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 "Team thoughts on continuous improvement 20"
(→Seed list for 07/12/2007 discussion) |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
== Seed list for 07/12/2007 discussion == | == Seed list for 07/12/2007 discussion == | ||
| − | * | + | *The bug approval process seemed to work well this time around - not that it hasn't worked before, but I think the approach of raising the number of required PMC votes gradually as we approached end of release was a very effective way of measuring and enforcing stabilization of the release without making it too difficult for components to fix key issues. (Chris Brealey) |
| − | * | + | *Strategically, the migration, re-versioning, re-packaging, re-factoring of several third-party bundles from WTP to Orbit was the right thing to do, however, I think we seriously underestimated the impact of the changes and made them far too late in WTP 2.0. For WTP 3.0, any further desired changes to third-party bundles should be raised as RFEs and completed before the penultimate milestone - not in the last milestone or during the Release Candidate cycle that follows. (Chris Brealey) |
* | * | ||
Revision as of 09:43, 21 June 2007
WTP 2.0 Debriefing
Purpose
Following our WTP 2.0 release, we want to have a short meeting with committers and contributors to discuss possible ways our project might improve. This can be things you don't like, things you like, things you want changed, improvements you think need to be made, process changes, etc. This feedback will become critical to our success and your happiness during WTP 3.0. :-)
Please use this page to express priorities, make notes, and brainstorm as many ideas as possible. This will serve as a seed list for the meeting on July 12th, 2007.
Seed list for 07/12/2007 discussion
- The bug approval process seemed to work well this time around - not that it hasn't worked before, but I think the approach of raising the number of required PMC votes gradually as we approached end of release was a very effective way of measuring and enforcing stabilization of the release without making it too difficult for components to fix key issues. (Chris Brealey)
- Strategically, the migration, re-versioning, re-packaging, re-factoring of several third-party bundles from WTP to Orbit was the right thing to do, however, I think we seriously underestimated the impact of the changes and made them far too late in WTP 2.0. For WTP 3.0, any further desired changes to third-party bundles should be raised as RFEs and completed before the penultimate milestone - not in the last milestone or during the Release Candidate cycle that follows. (Chris Brealey)