[equinox-dev] Fw: [eclipse-dev] Re: Eclipse 3.4 shape

[Pascal Rapicault <Pascal_Rapicault@xxxxxxxxxx>]

During the public EPP call of April 15th, the topic has been discussed and the EPP team showed a lot of reservation mostly because of time, availability of ppl, and robustness of the technology. However there was a consensus that this could be feasible for the Ganymede fall release. More precisely the worries were:
>From the EPP side:
- Time to change the EPP packager to do p2 operations
- Time to create the appropriate p2 metadata for the packages, change required to the EPP package config files, and have the package maintainers adapt
- Time to test the resulting packages since their creation process would have changed
- Time to ensure proper functioning of the installers on all platforms
- Consistency among all the deliverables

>From the p2 side:
- Making the installer robust and ensure its proper behaviour on all platforms
- Work load of the team
- Addressing problems wrt bundle pooling, GC and removal of installs
- Addressing issues around metadata generation

At the end of the discussion, the EPP team tasked me to consult with my PMC, communicate with the community on the eclipse-dev mailing (http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-dev/msg08091.html) and see if my team would have time to absorb the EPP requirements. Consequently, on the p2 call of April 21st (http://wiki.eclipse.org/Equinox_p2_Meeting_20080421), the p2 team discussed the issue and came to the conclusion that it was not reasonable to commit for 3.4.0 to an installer given the work load we had, that there were known issues and it had not received much testing. We also decided that will try to make a "technical-preview" available for 3.4.0 and we will make it real for 3.4.1.

PaScaL

----- Forwarded by Pascal Rapicault/Ottawa/IBM on 04/26/2008 01:30 PM -----

From:	"Jeff McAffer" <jeff@xxxxxxxxx>
To:	"'General development mailing list of the Eclipse project.'" <eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc:	"'Equinox development mailing list'" <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	04/26/2008 11:39 AM
Subject:	RE: [eclipse-dev] Re: Eclipse 3.4 shape

---

I think the EPP team is interested in doing this.  Do you see any technical
reasons why it cannot be done or is this mainly a coordination/timing issue?

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: eclipse-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pascal Rapicault
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 9:05 PM
> To: eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [eclipse-dev] Re: Eclipse 3.4 shape
> 
> 
> Given the load of work that the p2 team is facing, it has been decided
> to
> not promote the p2-based installer as a delivery format for 3.4.0 (we
> may
> make it early-access).
> However we will try to deliver it for 3.4.1 and get the EPP packages
> converted as well.
> 
> PaScaL
> 
> (initial discussion:
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-dev/msg08091.html)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-dev mailing list
> eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev

_______________________________________________
eclipse-dev mailing list
eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev