:). Just busy helping on BB10. I have commented on the bug. :D
From: David M Williams <david_willi...@us.ibm.com<mailto:david_willi...@us.ibm.com>> Reply-To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>> Date: Wednesday, 22 August, 2012 12:09 PM To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and readiness for Kepler M1 > ... yes, for me this is a bit of a silent protest. CDT has never > contributed to an M1 build. We're too busy with vacations or working > on SR-1 of the previous release. That was fine because we were > always enabled and picked up the final bits from the previous > release. I'm not pleased by this, and yes it's late, but then that's > why it shouldn't have been done to begin with (not so silent any more ;). What? Doug _quietly_ protesting?! Are you mellowing-out? Or, probably just too busy to take the time. :) Feel free to offer your views or counter suggestions to the bug that started this change in process: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=365738 (And, this applies to anyone). I agree, it has not gone well. I thought it would be an extremely easy way to address the concerns raised in that bug, but guess not. I'm not sure what else to suggest. From: Doug Schaefer <dschae...@qnx.com<mailto:dschae...@qnx.com>> To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>>, Date: 08/22/2012 10:05 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and readiness for Kepler M1 Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org> ________________________________ Back to someone's earlier question, yes, for me this is a bit of a silent protest. CDT has never contributed to an M1 build. We're too busy with vacations or working on SR-1 of the previous release. That was fine because we were always enabled and picked up the final bits from the previous release. I'm not pleased by this, and yes it's late, but then that's why it shouldn't have been done to begin with (not so silent any more ;). :D From: <Oberhuber>, Martin <martin.oberhu...@windriver.com<mailto:martin.oberhu...@windriver.com>> Reply-To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>> Date: Wednesday, 22 August, 2012 9:17 AM To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org>> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and readiness for Kepler M1 In fact I’ve enjoyed my vacation not checking Eclipse mailing lists recently J I’m going to enable the tm.b3aggrcon and tcf.b3aggrcon as soon as my SSH access to Eclipse.org is back https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=387782 Martin From: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org> [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org] On Behalf Of David M Williams Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 7:10 AM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org> Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and readiness for Kepler M1 Still 26 projects not enabled for Kepler M1. Can some one explain to me what this is about? Some passive aggressive protest? Too many people take vacation all summer and don't even check Eclipse mailing lists? Are projects just indecisive and think a commitment now means it is a written in stone promise (which is never the case). I know one or two people have mentioned they have special problems that will likely prevent participation in M1, but, If I hear nothing, I'll assume the remaining 24 or so are dropping out, and will remove those files from the 'master' branch. For those projects to rejoin later will take an exception since there's a requirement for those participating to "keep participating" or else inform us all you no longer plan to. The M4 deadline only applies to branch new projects, others (in previous release) expected to be in M1. http://wiki.eclipse.org/SimRel/Simultaneous_Release_Requirements#Integrate_Early_and_Often I should emphasize, if people do not want to be in sim. release, that's fine. It is a voluntary choice, and does take some amount of extra work. So, it doesn't mean you are a "bad project" or anything if you decide not to. But, it is only common courtesy to keep us informed explicitly. Thanks, amp.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build cdt.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build dltk.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build emf-query2.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build emft-ecoretools.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build emft-eef.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build emft-egf.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build emft-emffacet.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build epp-mpc.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build gmp-gmf-tooling.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build gyrex.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build jwt.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build mat.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build mdt-modisco.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build mdt-papyrus.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build mft.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build mylyn-docs-intent.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build pdt.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build rap.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build recommenders.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build rtp.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build scout.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build soa-bpel.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build soa-sca.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build tcf.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build tm.b3aggrcon - org.eclipse.simrel.build_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org<mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
