Notice: This Wiki is now read only and edits are no longer possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "RT/meetings/PMC Minutes 100922"
(New page: == Attendees == * Jeff == Agenda == * Hudson Instability == Hudson Instability ==) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* Jeff | * Jeff | ||
| + | * Glyn | ||
| + | * Tom | ||
| + | * Christian | ||
| + | * (JavaOne is consuming other attendees it appears) | ||
== Agenda == | == Agenda == | ||
* Hudson Instability | * Hudson Instability | ||
| + | * IP discussion | ||
| + | * CQ review | ||
== Hudson Instability == | == Hudson Instability == | ||
| + | * Glyn noted that over the past 6 months or so Virgo has had a number of IT challenges with changes to the infrastructure, getting setups to work with permissions, ... and wondered if this is typical, expected, ... | ||
| + | * Some amount of flux is always at play. There were some large hardware donations around EclipseCon this year so perhaps more servers are changing than usual | ||
| + | * Projects should review the services they view as critical and see if that matches with the list that the Webmaster treats as critical. If there is a mismatch, disappointment and frustration is likely to occur. | ||
| + | * Projects should raise their concerns directly with the Webmaster and EMO. Of course, if there is a broad consensus in the RT world that something should change, we can put that forward as an "RT community" request. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == IP discussion == | ||
| + | * summarized and discussed a little more on this ongoing IP policy topic around test/build/... dependencies | ||
| + | * Basically we don't know what to do with these dependencies but we cannot hold up projects | ||
| + | * While the IP team is sorting things out, we are going to enter and approve CQs (where that is not too onerous) and the IP team will review in due course. This unfortunately increases the IP team workload but the alternatives (e.g., not registering the dependencies) seem to be premature steps. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == CQ review == | ||
| + | * Reviewed and approved several CQs on the awaiting_pmc list | ||
Latest revision as of 10:17, 22 September 2010
Attendees
- Jeff
- Glyn
- Tom
- Christian
- (JavaOne is consuming other attendees it appears)
Agenda
- Hudson Instability
- IP discussion
- CQ review
Hudson Instability
- Glyn noted that over the past 6 months or so Virgo has had a number of IT challenges with changes to the infrastructure, getting setups to work with permissions, ... and wondered if this is typical, expected, ...
- Some amount of flux is always at play. There were some large hardware donations around EclipseCon this year so perhaps more servers are changing than usual
- Projects should review the services they view as critical and see if that matches with the list that the Webmaster treats as critical. If there is a mismatch, disappointment and frustration is likely to occur.
- Projects should raise their concerns directly with the Webmaster and EMO. Of course, if there is a broad consensus in the RT world that something should change, we can put that forward as an "RT community" request.
IP discussion
- summarized and discussed a little more on this ongoing IP policy topic around test/build/... dependencies
- Basically we don't know what to do with these dependencies but we cannot hold up projects
- While the IP team is sorting things out, we are going to enter and approve CQs (where that is not too onerous) and the IP team will review in due course. This unfortunately increases the IP team workload but the alternatives (e.g., not registering the dependencies) seem to be premature steps.
CQ review
- Reviewed and approved several CQs on the awaiting_pmc list