I can't teach myself to read every line in a log :)
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Nick Boldt wrote:
>> I don't see any error in the promotion log either:
>>
>> http://modeling.eclipse.org/promo_logs/promo_log_pdt_2.0.1.R200904281148_2009-05-01-03.46.48.txt
>> Weird.
>
> Not that wierd - just a
I don't see any error in the promotion log either:
http://modeling.eclipse.org/promo_logs/promo_log_pdt_2.0.1.R200904281148_2009-05-01-03.46.48.txt
Weird.
Not that wierd - just a poorly documented feature. :)
Note the following comments in the promo log:
[promote] Build will be hidden to all
There's probably some problem with promotion... I've just promoted
latest 2.0.1 build, but the page contains nothing:
http://www.eclipse.org/pdt/downloads/?project=pdt&showAll=1&hlbuild=R200904281148#R200904281148
I don't see any error in the promotion log either:
http://modeling.eclipse.org/promo
It's May 1, 9am GMT+2. I don't see PDT 2.0.1 yet:
http://www.eclipse.org/pdt/downloads/?project=&showAll=0&showMax=5&sortBy=date
Do we need a respin? Problem promoting it?
N
Dave Kelsey wrote:
+1 from me also for this.
Thanks
Dave Kelsey
pdt-dev-boun...@eclipse.org wrote on 30/04/2009 0
+1 from me also for this.
Thanks
Dave Kelsey
pdt-dev-boun...@eclipse.org wrote on 30/04/2009 05:31:05:
> Thanks Nick!
>
> Since the last 4 integration builds of PDT 2.0.1 are identical, i.e.
> nothing has been changed lately I think that we can say that people were
> playing with it enough.
,
- Roy
-Original Message-
From: pdt-dev-boun...@eclipse.org [mailto:pdt-dev-boun...@eclipse.org]
On Behalf Of Nick Boldt
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 7:30 PM
To: PDT Developers
Subject: Re: [pdt-dev] official release of maintenance for PDT 2.0
That's not really the way the Ec
> That's not really the way the Eclipse Development Process works:
> maintenance != new features.
Yes, of course, and I'm not requesting any new features: Code-completion (for
example) is already present in the 2.0-branch. It certainly can't be considered
broken (at least not in the current M-b
That's not really the way the Eclipse Development Process works:
maintenance != new features. That said, "urgently needed" can be
interpreted as "this missing functionality makes the release unusable"
and therefore justifies the change. But IANAL, TINLA, and my
interpretation of the EDP should
> After all, the maintenance branch is only for urgent bug fixes,
Slightly off-topic, but I have to take the opportunity:
Since "urgent" seems to be equal to "none at all" during the last 3 months (or
so), I consider this "only urgent bug fixes"-constraint a bit problematic: All
the "nice" fixe
I agree - given 2.0.0 came out late December, we're prolly due for an R
build this month.
Do we need a formal freeze period, followed by an RC or two? Or should
we just cut a new build and call it R? After all, the maintenance branch
is only for urgent bug fixes, so it's pretty stable and the
When is this planned ? It seems to have gone very quiet. I know there are
some fixes released as integration builds but I could really use an
official 2.0.1 release ?
Regards
Dave Kelsey
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with numbe
11 matches
Mail list logo
