Difference between revisions of "ESC minutes"
From Apache OpenOffice Wiki
(→[http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3687 calc: persist csv import settings]) |
(→[http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66680 gsl: image shrink - ka009]) |
||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
==== [http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66680 gsl: image shrink - ka009] ==== | ==== [http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66680 gsl: image shrink - ka009] ==== | ||
| − | + | * mba: talked to KaiA today, for an explanation. Not a high priority for him, and a wide change, somehow always other higher priority tasks. | |
| − | + | * mmeeks: why such a huge problem for QA ? what would these guys do ? | |
| − | + | * nils: (after introduction) - depends on the change: run the test-tool over it, and poke on specifics identified by the developer. Looked at this CWS - it was resynched many times, but never marked 'Ready for QA'. | |
| − | + | * mmeeks: can we accelerate the QA process with tooling ? | |
| − | + | * mba: plenty of examples of internal Sun CWS' that just never made it, priorities changed etc. Surely Novell can do QA on it themselves ? (perhaps problems with multiple platforms) ? | |
| − | + | * mmeeks: we can do that, but we already ship it to our customers, we tested it ourselves etc. what more needs doing ? we filed up-stream for patch review: no response. | |
| − | + | * mba: patch review is not possible for all patches; huge backlog of them, and the burden is too high. | |
| − | + | * mmeeks: it is not a goal then to review all patches ? | |
| + | * mba: no, can't be done for all incoming patches. | ||
| − | + | * mmeeks: I expect (from other projects) that there is a maintainer / gate-keeper for all code, that is ultimately responsible, and cares about that code and that has the final say for inclusion; is that not the case in OO.o ? | |
| − | + | * Nesshof: not totally true - project leads should be able to find people with some interest in a piece of code to do some review. The idea is everyone can change any code, there is no dedicated ownership. | |
| − | + | * mba: lots of old code, ~50% of modules may have no maintainer. Mozilla too is extremely slow at responding to patches. Not all Open Source projects have a clear maintainership structure. OO.o can't be compared with anything else, too many millions of lines. | |
| − | + | * mmeeks: well, it's really unusual (in my experience) not to have anyone responsible for each bit of code; it needs documenting. | |
| − | + | ||
=== coordinating the next feature releases === | === coordinating the next feature releases === | ||
Revision as of 19:29, 14 May 2007
Engineering Steering Committee Meetings Minutes
The Engineering Steering Committee meets every two weeks on Monday 4pm UTC (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html).
Contents
agenda for next meetings
2007-05-28
- regular review of long-term road-blocked patches
open agenda items
- OpenOffice.org source control system (SCM): what is the roadmap for the future ?
Minutes
2007-05-14
regular review of long-term road-blocked patches
calc: persist csv import settings
- mmeeks: walk through of the timeline
- mba: something that the IRT/IIT metrics don't catch
- mba: UE team don't track issues regularly & Falko left
- mmeeks: It seems some people (UE) demand their say, but then don't say anything.
- mba: didn't we suggest timeouts for non-controversial changes before ? here for User Experience ?
- mmeeks: yes - but discarded by QA previously, as part of stymied new inclusion work-flow.
- Nesshof: did you consider mailing dev@specs to ping them ?
- mmeeks: no; we don't have the issue in our ooo-builds, why burn yet more time here ?
gsl: image shrink - ka009
- mba: talked to KaiA today, for an explanation. Not a high priority for him, and a wide change, somehow always other higher priority tasks.
- mmeeks: why such a huge problem for QA ? what would these guys do ?
- nils: (after introduction) - depends on the change: run the test-tool over it, and poke on specifics identified by the developer. Looked at this CWS - it was resynched many times, but never marked 'Ready for QA'.
- mmeeks: can we accelerate the QA process with tooling ?
- mba: plenty of examples of internal Sun CWS' that just never made it, priorities changed etc. Surely Novell can do QA on it themselves ? (perhaps problems with multiple platforms) ?
- mmeeks: we can do that, but we already ship it to our customers, we tested it ourselves etc. what more needs doing ? we filed up-stream for patch review: no response.
- mba: patch review is not possible for all patches; huge backlog of them, and the burden is too high.
- mmeeks: it is not a goal then to review all patches ?
- mba: no, can't be done for all incoming patches.
- mmeeks: I expect (from other projects) that there is a maintainer / gate-keeper for all code, that is ultimately responsible, and cares about that code and that has the final say for inclusion; is that not the case in OO.o ?
- Nesshof: not totally true - project leads should be able to find people with some interest in a piece of code to do some review. The idea is everyone can change any code, there is no dedicated ownership.
- mba: lots of old code, ~50% of modules may have no maintainer. Mozilla too is extremely slow at responding to patches. Not all Open Source projects have a clear maintainership structure. OO.o can't be compared with anything else, too many millions of lines.
- mmeeks: well, it's really unusual (in my experience) not to have anyone responsible for each bit of code; it needs documenting.
coordinating the next feature releases
Clarify what the important issues for the next releases are, who is doing what work, next major version of OpenOffice.org
Nesshof: Please update Features page with details.
coordination of new features
We just experience that two groups Novell and CH2000 are working on the same feature (text grid control)
mmeeks: This is an issue of CH2000 not doing their work in a public fashion, Novell consulted, blogged, and took this to the ODF TC. xiuzhi: to avoid the confilt with other voluteers again,I will give a list of new feature we will submited
2007-04-30
participants: cmc, mh, pjanik, vq
1. IRC, Telecon, Telecon/IRC, Skype meetings?
mh will provide dial in number until May 14th Idea: should we try using e.g. Skype?
2. Nils, Xiuzhi and Dieter will be added to the list.
3. AI: mmeeks will provide list of top 10 patches and we will try to cover first 2 - 3 in a meeting ?
