I've updated the database.
I'll work through how this got messed up, and how we move forward
with Tom and Wim.
Wayne
On 07/01/2013 06:00 PM, Tom Schindl
wrote:
2. Nebula apparently has not produced a
1.0 release despite a
Hey gang,
We have a discussion going in the CDT community and we are currently planning
out how to achieve a 6 month release cycle. The feeling is that we need to get
new features out faster to our users. The year long wait we currently have is
making releases sluggish and I fear it's slowing
I agree, one year is way too long. I am not even sure 6 months is often
enough. We had three m2e releases between Juno and Kepler, and I
consider m2e mature, (relatively) low-activity project. At the same
time, I never use R builds myself, I always use M-builds as primary
development environment
Funny, that came up in our conversation too. Years ago, M releases were
awesome. They always had new features and the quality was pretty good. But then
the quality stopped being so good and there were less features, so people cared
less about M releases. And that has left a long period of time
One of the things we need to understand is *what do we want from a release
train?*
1. Is it simply a release of the latest and greatest stuff Eclipse has?
2. Is it a set of plugins / components that are known to 'work together'?
3. Is it a co-ordinated marketing exercise?
4. Is it a snap-shot in
What's the point of releasing often if there are no new features?
--
Regards,
Igor
On 2013-07-02 11:56 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
Funny, that came up in our conversation too. Years ago, M releases were
awesome. They always had new features and the quality was pretty good. But then
the quality
Spurring on the development of new features is part of what's driving
this. Only the early adopters ever download milestone builds and we're
trying to be more agile to a larger audience by going twice as often.
D
On 13-07-02 4:17 PM, Igor Fedorenko ifedore...@sonatype.com wrote:
What's the
We're still debating what to do with the SR-2. The proposal was an early
conservative one that was aimed to appease the community that doesn't want to
live on the bleeding edge. Egit, you pretty much have to live on the bleeding
edge since it's still pushing some basic features that everyone
It goes back to the primary goal behind simrel. The original goal was to
synchronize the releases and aggregation was secondary. With some projects
wishing to release more frequently and some projects slowing down, perhaps
the primary focus should be on aggregation rather than synchronizing
