Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Sorry for the late reply. See comments inline. On 13.04.2017 16:27, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote: >> On 13. Apr 2017, at 07:52, Frederic Gurr wrote: >> I have to disagree on that one. I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of >> people rely on documentation for old releases. >

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

> On 13. Apr 2017, at 07:52, Frederic Gurr wrote: > I have to disagree on that one. I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of > people rely on documentation for old releases. Frederic, I'm basically challenging two things: 1) How different and relevant really is old

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org> Date: 13.04.2017 15:13 Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3 Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org Hi Fred, > I tend to

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Yes. Dani From: Frederic Gurr <frederic.g...@eclipse.org> To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Date: 13.04.2017 15:58 Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3 Sent by:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org Jonah and Dani,

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

I’m with Fred on this one. Many (industrial) companies rely on older software simply because of the life time of their products - and not all are making use of LTS to manage this. In such environments, it is sometimes a great effort to move to newer releases, especially ones that occur yearly…

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

v@eclipse.org> > Date: 13.04.2017 15:13 > Subject:Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3 > Sent by:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org > > > > > Hi Fred,

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Hi, I have to disagree on that one. I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of people rely on documentation for old releases. Not everyone can always switch to the latest release, especially if a company ships a RCP based product that it has to support. In that case, the latest info center could be

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

don't think we should manage help centers for each update release though. Dani From: Jonah Graham <jo...@kichwacoders.com> To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org> Date: 13.04.2017 15:13 Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

One overall. Frankly, I don't see a need for presenting old documentation. -Gunnar -- Gunnar Wagenknecht gun...@wagenknecht.org, http://guw.io/ > On 13. Apr 2017, at 06:55, Frederic Gurr wrote: > > Just to clarify, ONE help center per release or overall? > >

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Hi Fred, > I tend to agree. Service releases *should* not add new features or introduce breaking changes, but mostly fix bugs. Can you confirm the "*should*" applies only to the platform? AFAIK the whole idea of changing from SRx style to .x style was to acknowledge that .x releases did indeed

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Just to clarify, ONE help center per release or overall? On 11.04.2017 20:00, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote: > I'm in favor of running just ONE help center labeled "latest". > > We don't have an official SLA around packages. Especially when a new major > release is out we stop providing builds of an

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Hi, I tend to agree. Service releases *should* not add new features or introduce breaking changes, but mostly fix bugs. So I guess the documentation can be considered to only improve from GA to the .3 release. For example, it's unlikely that the latest version of the info center of Neon (from the

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

I'm in favor of running just ONE help center labeled "latest". We don't have an official SLA around packages. Especially when a new major release is out we stop providing builds of an older release. -Gunnar -- Gunnar Wagenknecht gun...@wagenknecht.org, http://guw.io/ > On 11. Apr 2017,

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

+1 Greg > On Apr 11, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Denis Roy wrote: > > I think we should have only one infocenter per major release (ie, a > single Neon infocenter). > > Denis > > On 04/11/2017 05:22 AM, Frederic Gurr wrote: >> Hi, >> >> There was no feedback in two weeks, so I

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Hi I think so too, but I'm old fashioned and think that .1, .2, .3 should be maintenance releases. Since it was agreed that .1, .2, .3 could ship new releases, they need correspondingly new documentation. Regards Ed Willink On 11/04/2017 16:03, Denis Roy wrote: I think we

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

I think we should have only one infocenter per major release (ie, a single Neon infocenter). Denis On 04/11/2017 05:22 AM, Frederic Gurr wrote: > Hi, > > There was no feedback in two weeks, so I consider the info center for > Neon.3 done. > > I'd like to gather some opinions about the following

Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Hi, There was no feedback in two weeks, so I consider the info center for Neon.3 done. I'd like to gather some opinions about the following question: Should there be a separate info center for every release and service release (e.g. separate info center for Neon.0, Neon.1, Neon.2, Neon.3), or

[cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3

Hi, The info center for the Neon.3 release is now available here: http://help.eclipse.org/neon3/index.jsp As proposed in Bug 499411 (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=499411), project's participation in the info center has changed from opt-in to opt-out. Compared to the Neon info