Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "Planning Council/January 06 2016"
(→Neon + 1 Planning) |
m (/* Neon Planning (and beyond)) |
||
Line 160: | Line 160: | ||
* Should we change "maintenance" staging name now? for Mars.2? See {{bug|483475}}. | * Should we change "maintenance" staging name now? for Mars.2? See {{bug|483475}}. | ||
+ | |||
+ | : - Since "Nick votes for soon", I will ask: "Any objections"? | ||
+ | |||
+ | : [See also {{bug|483786}} for unreleated additional URL.] | ||
+ | |||
* Release Policy vs. Release mechanics. This is being tracked in {{bug|483322}}. | * Release Policy vs. Release mechanics. This is being tracked in {{bug|483322}}. | ||
Line 180: | Line 185: | ||
* Should the ability to update from yearly release to yearly release be a 'requirement'? | * Should the ability to update from yearly release to yearly release be a 'requirement'? | ||
:: What would this take? (Such as features are never "just removed" but are replaced or transitioned?) | :: What would this take? (Such as features are never "just removed" but are replaced or transitioned?) | ||
− | :: What testing would projects have to do? | + | :: What testing would projects have to do? |
+ | :: May become "defacto requirement" once {{bug|483786}} is implemented. | ||
== Neon + 1 Planning == | == Neon + 1 Planning == |
Revision as of 12:56, 6 January 2016
Contents
Logistics
Meeting Title: | Planning Council Conference Call |
Date & Time: | Wednesday, January 6, 2016, at 1200 Noon Eastern |
Dial in: | (See Asterisk service for complete details on SIP, potential new numbers, phone mute commands, etc.)
Phone Numbers: (Check Asterisk/Numbers for more or current phone numbers.)
|
Members and Attendees
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Note: "Inactive" refers to Strategic Members or PMCs we have not heard from for a while and have been unable to convince to participate. Those members can become active again at any time. Contact David Williams if questions.
Note: feel free to correct any errors/omissions in above attendance record.
Y = Yes, attended
N = No, did not
R = regrets sent ahead of time
D = delegated
X = not expected
Announcements
- ?
Previous meeting minutes
- Review previous meeting minutes if you'd like. That is, review them before the meeting, but if questions or issues with previous minutes, this would be a good time to bring them up.
Mars Planning
- Mars.2 issues?
- Remember Mars.2 RCs begin Jan 15 to Jan 22.
- Tracking participation in minor releases bug 485223
Neon Planning (and beyond)
- Our Neon Plan is now official.
- Should we change "maintenance" staging name now? for Mars.2? See bug 483475.
- - Since "Nick votes for soon", I will ask: "Any objections"?
- [See also bug 483786 for unreleated additional URL.]
- Release Policy vs. Release mechanics. This is being tracked in bug 483322.
- One proposal: have all features in EPP packages be "root features" and establish a procedure of adding new code to the Sim. Release repository "at any time" (or, say, once per month?) -- say for "hot fixes" only ... say after review/approval by Planning Council?
- AND, to avoid "contamination" of update site lists (without the user being in charge of it) change p2 install/update to not allow the addition of reference repositories during feature installs. But, it has been stated, adopters still want that ability ... so, not sure how "we" could ever know the difference.
- Perhaps could solve with a "product preference" so EPP could "set" the preference one way, and adopters creating products could set it another way? Or, direct users to do so?
- Easy for me to say "change p2" :) but ... who would do the work?
- Perhaps solve simply with a "policy" of "do not add reference repositories" (with feature installs)?
- But without some way to enforce it, I think some projects still would.
- This "reference repositories issue" was a discussed as a concern at Architecture Council
- Apparently there have been cases of users getting "mixed" installs because reference repositories are sometimes very broad. [I hope I've captured the issue correctly, I was not there, so please correct if I read it wrong.]
- Perhaps could solve with a "product preference" so EPP could "set" the preference one way, and adopters creating products could set it another way? Or, direct users to do so?
- Does Oomph solve this problem at all? Does it have a possible solution?
- From Ed's note to ide-dev list, it sounds like it solves the issue of updating non-root features (as long as they are "in the repository"?).
- Rolling "release" issue.
- I have sometimes heard it suggested we allow more of a "continuous release". Is this something we should discuss? Should we have some long term planning for it? Such as, what would it take to accomplish that?
- This could be planned with or without the "beta stream" mechanisms sometimes discussed.
- Should the ability to update from yearly release to yearly release be a 'requirement'?
- What would this take? (Such as features are never "just removed" but are replaced or transitioned?)
- What testing would projects have to do?
- May become "defacto requirement" once bug 483786 is implemented.
Neon + 1 Planning
- How's "naming" coming?
- Poll: https://www.eclipse.org/neon/planning/poll.php -> http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_dd4ff581da35bddc
- Current winner with 242 votes and 8 days left: Oxygen
EclipseCon Face-to-face
- Joint meeting with Arch. Council.
- Participate on EclipseCon2016/Councils_Face-to-Face.
- Suggest times on doodle poll.
New Business
- ?
Next Meeting
- February 3, 2016 - Regular First Wednesday Meeting