harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexei Fedotov" <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] freeze for M5.5_Eclipse_TPTP
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:52:10 GMT
Hello,
I don't think that any way of producing formal milestones should end
up with distributing binaries through ASF sites. I have seen a lot of
partial but formal milestones in my life. Can we think of a
lightweight but formal milestone, which is limited to a letter from
Stepan which contains <revision number> + <release name>, a formal
vote which does not have votes against, and a news feed on the our
side which reports the revision and the name?

Thanks.

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Stepan Mishura
<stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/24/08, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>  >
>  > In message <480DC6F6.4000006@gmail.com>, Tim Ellison writes:
>  > >
>  > > I'm really not convinced this is a good idea for Harmony, and my
>  > > concerns are in two parts:
>  > >
>  > > 1) Our schedule should not be dictated by an external project,
>  > > especially when it is their process that seems to be setting the
>  > > artificial time limit.  Why not show some flexibility to meet our
>  > > dates?
>  > >
>  > > 2) Our principle delivery mechanism is source code.  While we make
>  > > binaries available as a convenience we should not encourage dependents
>  > > to put dependencies on our build tools.  They should take source and
>  > > compile it themselves for their own environment.
>  >
>  > I agree with Tim on this issue.  I think making a release, with the
>  > testing, evaluation and voting involved, should not be something that
>  > downstream projects dictate.  Doing this release would seem to set a
>  > precedent that I would not be happy with.
>  >
>  > I would be inclined to vote -1 for any formal release that isn't simply
>  > the next milestone release.  Of course, this is not necessarily my final
>  > decision.
>  >
>  > The downstream project should use our current release or if they have
>  > a desperate need for something more recent then they should be more
>  > flexible.
>  >
>
>  It makes me sad :-(
>
>  We ask another project to be more flexible but we are not ready to be
>  flexible too - we scheduled M6 to mid of May and we couldn't move it
>  to the end of April. We are discussing the request almost for 2 weeks
>  (this time is enough to make full milestone testing cycle) and I've
>  not heard any strong argument for having it in mid of May expect that
>  we scheduled it to this date. ;-(
>
>  Thanks,
>  Stepan.
>
>  > Regards,
>  >  Mark.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>



-- 
With best regards,
Alexei

Mime
View raw message