Ok. I am fine with treating RDB as an
exception. We do need to make sure that there are no API changes, breakages.
From: David M Williams
[mailto:david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 6:49
PM
To: raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx;
WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements, and Group
discussions)
Subject: Re: [wtp-pmc] FW:
[wtp-dev] RDB Requests PMC Approval For WTP 1.5.5 Defects
RDB is an exception. Since this is their _only_ avenue
to "ship code" -- and their last opportunity at that. Their
intent is, I think, is defensible and worth while for an "end of
life" component. Not all adopters can migrate to DTP yet, and some of
these enhancements are to maintain parity with or for DTP, so once those
adopters do migrate, it will still be equivalent (that is, there is no
split-stream-like departure from the strategic direction of DTP). Plus,
it's relatively safe, since the RDB code is highly independent of the rest of
WTP.
As
I explained in one of our phone meetings, myself and the RDB team discussed the
possibility of doing this work as "private patches" to RDB, but I
encouraged them to do this work "in the open", as the best approach
most likely to not surprise or interfere with any other adopters.
Of
course, that's also why we have PMC review ... feel free to voice other
opinions.
Or,
if you were simply asking if others would be proposing feature enhancements to
1.5.5, the answer is no (at least, none that I know of!).
If
they do, I know my criteria for acceptance will be much much higher than for
this RDB work!
Thanks,
|
"raghunathan
srinivasan" <raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent
by: wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
05/23/2007 09:17 PM
|
Please
respond to
"raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx" <raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>;
Please respond to
"WTP PMC communications \(including coordination, announcements,
and Group discussions\)"
<wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
|
To
|
"WTP PMC communications (including
coordination, announcements, and Group
discussions)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
[wtp-pmc] FW: [wtp-dev] RDB Requests PMC
Approval For WTP 1.5.5 Defects
|
|
Hi,
I reviewed 1880243 and 188761. The ‘patch’
has extensive code changes and looks more like a feature enhancement. Is
RDB an exception or do we plan to include such enhancements in a maintenance
release?
-Raghu
From:
wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lawrence E Dunnell
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:21 PM
To: wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [wtp-dev] RDB Requests PMC Approval For WTP 1.5.5 Defects
180243 enhancements proposed for Access Control package of SQLModel & code
regen using EMF2.2.1
188716 Extensibility for associating a State with any Object of the DB Explorer
188734 Animation/UI Job for Node Expansion/Catalog loading in the Database Explorer
188758 Add a Diagram Group to the Database Explorer Context Menu stack
188761 Database Explorer Connection Management Enhancements
Larry Dunnell
RAD Data Tools, DB2 Tooling, Eclipse WTP Project and Eclipse DTP Project
IBM DB2 Information Management Software_______________________________________________
wtp-pmc mailing list
wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-pmc
