How about an automated questionnaire sent to the project leads each milestone? As long as the questions dont take a lot of time (a few multiple-choices), it shouldnt be a great inconvenience. Since the questionnaire arrives in the inbox, it serves as an automatic reminder.
- Konstantin From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Wayne Beaton Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:34 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects Just musing here, and this is something for the postmortem, but... I think we need to have some sort of heartbeat monitor on all participating projects. Several projects disappeared or were unresponsive at certain points through the release. I don't think it's unreasonable to have every participating project check in on all milestone dates. Does that seem reasonable? Perhaps with Luna, we can ask the PMCs to report on the liveliness/preparedness of their projects with each milestone? I'm thinking a simple go/no-go status. If it makes it easier to track, we can open the release tracking bugs much earlier in the process. Thoughts? Also... I believe that most project plans were created in the last two weeks. This is unacceptable. A project plan needs to be established early in the release cycle. It can change; it can as simple as a single "we're just fixing bugs" theme. But it needs to exist and it needs to have some sort of value. Plans can (and do) change during a release cycle. If there is anything that we can do with the PMI to make this easier, please let me know (open bugs against "Community/Project Management & Portal"). Making clones of release records (including plan and review documentation) is already on my list (Bug 410512). Wayne On 06/11/2013 05:37 AM, Benjamin Cabé wrote: Hello, We are in the process of making a last minute build of Lua Development Tools against DLTK 5 and therefore there should be no showstopper for RC4. This is very unfortunate though, and is costing us lots of efforts to validate the product against this new major version, while we deliberately used the last couple weeks to stabilize and validate it. I would like to re-iterate that it's really not acceptable on the long run to rely on a framework that shipped its p2 repo (and contribution to Kepler) for the first time of the release train on June 6. Also, it is really unclear when one should expect milestones from DLTK, since I don't think a project plan is actually maintained by the project (?) Thank you, Benjamin-- De : John Arthorne <[email protected]> Répondre à : Cross project issues <[email protected]> Date : lundi 10 juin 2013 20:35 À : Cross project issues <[email protected]> Objet : Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects I recall the planning council recently decided on a policy that we would not allow a new release of a project to appear for the first time after RC1. Am I remembering that incorrectly? This is exactly the kind of last minute change that caused trouble for the release train in Juno SR2. I think at this point they should be contributing the same release that was contributed in RC1, which sounds like 4.0. John From: David M Williams <[email protected]> To: Cross project issues <[email protected]>, Date: 06/07/2013 09:52 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects Sent by: [email protected] _____ I agree its "not cool". I do not know their reasons for it. I do recall them sending a note a month or two ago "asking for preferences" ... so suggest you and DLTK project work out which is best (for you to move to 5.x or them to revert to 4.x). There should only be one version major version in the common repository. Good luck, From: Benjamin Cabé <[email protected]> To: Cross project issues <[email protected]>, Date: 06/07/2013 09:40 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects Sent by: [email protected] _____ Hi, Contributing DLTK 5.0 and removing 4.0 at the very last minute (RC3) to the Kepler repo with no previous contribution before that would have allowed Koneki Lua Development Tools to be tested against it, is not really cool to say the least. LDT contribution to Kepler is now broken. Any chance to also include DLTK 4.0 into the Kepler repo? Thanks. Benjamin-- De : Alexey Panchenko < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Répondre à : Cross project issues < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Date : jeudi 9 mai 2013 17:49 À : Cross project issues < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Objet : Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Missing release information for some Kepler projects Hi, Unfortunately The DLTK team were quite busy this year with other projects. Initially the previous (4.0, released 2012) version was added to Kepler, with the intent to replace it later with the 5.0 builds from master. So far, that did not happen yet, partly because of source control (-> git) & build system (-> tycho) changes. AFAIK DLTK is used by PDT and Koneki-Lua Development Tools. So the question to these projects: what DLTK version would you prefer in Kepler? Regards, Alex On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Wayne Beaton < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote: I am now only missing the information for the DLTK and Runtime Packaging (RTP) project. I have contacted DLTK via their mailing list; Ian has contacted the RTP project leaders directly (thanks, Ian). I noticed that DLTK is contributing their 4.0 release build (from Juno) to Kepler, despite there being some apparent activity in the project Git repositories. I don't know if there is any specific issue with this, but thought that I'd point it out in case any downstream consumers had any concerns/issues. Thanks, Wayne On 04/26/2013 02:38 PM, Wayne Beaton wrote: I am missing release information for the following projects that have declared intent to participate in Kepler. C/C++ Development Tools (CDT) Dynamic Languages Toolkit (DLTK) Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) Eclipse Communication Framework (ECF) Runtime Packaging Project (RTP) EclipseLink Ecore Tools Extended Editing Framework (EEF) Jubula Functional Testing Tool MDT XSD (XML Schema Definition) Maven Integration for Web Tools Platform SCA Tools In some cases, it may be that I just can't sort out what release you want to include, or maybe you're planning to include a release that does not occur on the Kepler release date (which I find weird, but is otherwise okay). If you have not done so already, please visit your project's information page and create a release record for Kepler and then please let me know either on this list or via direct email so that I can update the Kepler release page. I will not accept review documentation for any release that is not recorded in the project metadata. While you're there, please take a few minutes to update the description and plan information for your release. The description should be a short paragraph that concisely describes the high points of the release. Note that you can still use the old XML-file based plan format if you like using old and painful technology. You can quickly get access to your project's information page directly from the Kepler release page: <https://projects.eclipse.org/releases/kepler> https://projects.eclipse.org/releases/kepler Let me know if you require any assistance. Wayne -- Wayne Beaton Director of Open Source Projects, <http://www.eclipse.org/> The Eclipse Foundation Learn about <http://www.eclipse.org/projects> Eclipse Projects <http://www.eclipsecon.org/france2013> EclipseCon France 2013 ____________ _________________________ __________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton Director of Open Source Projects, <http://www.eclipse.org/> The Eclipse Foundation Learn about <http://www.eclipse.org/projects> Eclipse Projects <http://www.eclipsecon.org/france2013> EclipseCon France 2013 _________________________ ______________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _________________ _________________________ _____ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev [attachment "480x60.png" deleted by David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM] [attachment "ATT00001.png" deleted by David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM] _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation <http://www.eclipse.org> Learn about Eclipse Projects <http://www.eclipse.org/projects> <http://www.eclipsecon.org/france2013> EclipseCon France 2013
_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
