Skip to main content


Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Language IDEs » PHP Development Tools (PDT) » Dev2QA docs
Dev2QA docs [message #71264] Mon, 19 May 2008 16:32 Go to next message
Roy Ganor is currently offline Roy GanorFriend
Messages: 150
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Shalom has released few documents about his last work on PDT 1.1. maybe it
will be of interest of some of you...

http://wiki.eclipse.org/PDT/1.1_Plan#DEV_2_QA

Thanks Shalom!
Re: Dev2QA docs [message #71303 is a reply to message #71264] Tue, 20 May 2008 11:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ingo Renner is currently offline Ingo RennerFriend
Messages: 40
Registered: July 2009
Member
Roy Ganor wrote:

Hi Roy,

> Shalom has released few documents about his last work on PDT 1.1. maybe
> it will be of interest of some of you...
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/PDT/1.1_Plan#DEV_2_QA

looks very promising, so can we expect this in the next integration
release - and when would that be?


Ingo
PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs) [message #71360 is a reply to message #71264] Tue, 20 May 2008 22:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bernd Oliver Sünderhauf is currently offline Bernd Oliver SünderhaufFriend
Messages: 3
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Yeah, those specs are cool!
I must admit though, that I'd prefer getting those countless bugs fixed
before adding new functionality.

It is hard to believe that there are really one or two developers at
Zend exclusively assigned to PDT. Given that we are talking about a
plugin that reuses most functionality from the Eclipse core and other
framework plugins, development is really slow.

Also, compared to most successful Open Source projects, the cooperation
between Senior developers and users that are willing to contribute is
very poor:
- Bugs filed by users usually don't receive a response for months.
- Feature requests usually never ever get a response. Even if there is a
chance that the proposed feature is taken into account, there is simply
no feedback.
- Time schedules are not reliable at all (let's not talk about the
Ganymede Simultaneous Release...).
- Apart from the uncertainty, Integration releases are not published
regularly, and they are neither commented nor documented ("What's new" etc.)
- Code changes by the Zend team are not discussed in Bugzilla tickets
but committed without further notice.

This is the contrary to Open Source community-building. No one would
complain if the product were really good, but not even that is the case.
I can't help but this looks like Zend doesn't really want PDT to be a
major success.

Please understand that my hard criticism does not mean that I don't see
the potential power of the PDT project. And yes, I'm using PDT! If I
wouldn't care, I would move on to PHPEclipse or use some dedicated PHP
Editor. I'm just expecting you to come off your high horse and see us
either as clients to compete for or as partners to work with.

Regards, Pancho


Roy Ganor wrote:
> Shalom has released few documents about his last work on PDT 1.1. maybe
> it will be of interest of some of you...
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/PDT/1.1_Plan#DEV_2_QA
>
> Thanks Shalom!
>
Re: PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs) [message #71416 is a reply to message #71360] Wed, 21 May 2008 13:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: spam.networks.fi

Bernd Oliver Sünderhauf wrote:
> Please understand that my hard criticism does not mean that I don't see
> the potential power of the PDT project. And yes, I'm using PDT! If I
> wouldn't care, I would move on to PHPEclipse or use some dedicated PHP
> Editor. I'm just expecting you to come off your high horse and see us
> either as clients to compete for or as partners to work with.

Is PHPEclipse still developed? Nothing seems to happen on their homepage
though.
Re: PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs) [message #71435 is a reply to message #71416] Wed, 21 May 2008 13:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bernd Oliver Sünderhauf is currently offline Bernd Oliver SünderhaufFriend
Messages: 3
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Jasmo Hiltula wrote:
> Is PHPEclipse still developed? Nothing seems to happen on their homepage
> though.

Their homepage is a mess and has been neglected for a long time. But
look at their Trac project (http://dev.phpeclipse.com) - there's quite
some work going on. Yes, they missed their Milestone goals, but finally
they seem to be really low on manpower. Seems like some three or four
more active developers would make a difference.

Even if PHPEclipse is far behind. Fact is, that PHPEclipse is a truly
open source project: Open code + open process (see
http://pooteeweet.org/blog/348 for an interesting write-up on this). One
is more forgiving towards temporary weaknesses of a community driven
project, because one knows that in the end he's getting more value.

I'm gonna be waiting for the Zend team to respond to my "Wake up call".
If things don't change for the better here, I'll reconsider PHPEclipse.

Regards, Pancho
Re: PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs) [message #71453 is a reply to message #71360] Wed, 21 May 2008 17:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Roy Ganor is currently offline Roy GanorFriend
Messages: 150
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Bernd,
First thank you for your notes, it's really important to hear feedback
from the community about the development cycle.

Regarding your questions:

> Yeah, those specs are cool!
> I must admit though, that I'd prefer getting those countless bugs fixed
> before adding new functionality.

Stabilizing PDT and improving its performance are absolutely in the center
of our work toward PDT 1.0.3 and PDT 1.1, also we are working hard on
defining a better API, which will be robust and adhere extensibility.

> It is hard to believe that there are really one or two developers at
> Zend exclusively assigned to PDT. Given that we are talking about a
> plugin that reuses most functionality from the Eclipse core and other
> framework plugins, development is really slow.

Development is not slow, you can browse to http://www.ohloh.net/ and check
out the contribution level which is very high.

> Also, compared to most successful Open Source projects, the cooperation
> between Senior developers and users that are willing to contribute is
> very poor:
> - Bugs filed by users usually don't receive a response for months.
> - Feature requests usually never ever get a response. Even if there is a
> chance that the proposed feature is taken into account, there is simply
> no feedback.

This section contradicts your first issue, we can't enhance it until the
environment is stable and robust.

> - Time schedules are not reliable at all (let's not talk about the
> Ganymede Simultaneous Release...).

We should deliver things on time - that's for sure. still when someone is
popping out about a question about the road map we respond.

> - Apart from the uncertainty, Integration releases are not published
> regularly, and they are neither commented nor documented ("What's new" etc.)

I will try to set an automatic integration build which will deliver it
each weekend.

> - Code changes by the Zend team are not discussed in Bugzilla tickets
> but committed without further notice.

We use pdt-dev mailing list to keep our developers updated. In the near
future we will expose the new API for adopters in the Eclipse corner site.

> This is the contrary to Open Source community-building. No one would
> complain if the product were really good, but not even that is the case.
> I can't help but this looks like Zend doesn't really want PDT to be a
> major success.

You saved the most important thing to the end :) I think that this issue
summarises all of your sayings.

Let's define the problem - in spite of the fact that we have a fabulous
community of end-users, the code contribution made to Eclipse PDT is
composed of 99% of Zend's stuff, and 1% from the outside world. This is
not the diversity that open source project should have, but the fact is
that there are no PHP developers that contribute to Eclipse PDT. For
example, in the last EclipseCon I was amazed by the people contributing to
JDT / WTP / EMF.

> Please understand that my hard criticism does not mean that I don't see
> the potential power of the PDT project. And yes, I'm using PDT! If I
> wouldn't care, I would move on to PHPEclipse or use some dedicated PHP
> Editor. I'm just expecting you to come off your high horse and see us
> either as clients to compete for or as partners to work with.

Any criticism is welcomed in the open source world but you can't really
say it forever without even trying to help the development. We welcome
anyone in the community to contribute and once things are tested we will
be more than happy to join the contributor.

I don't want to sound like braggart but Eclipse PDT overcomes PHPEclipse
in many ways (and Yes I am aware of their good progress), the first thing
that make us better is that we are based on WTP that is a great framework
for web development environment, the second is that we aligned with the
Eclipse way that is important when working with Eclipse.

> Regards, Pancho

hope this answers your questions, you are more than welcome to resume
criticise and ask more question :)

- Roy
Re: PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs) [message #71473 is a reply to message #71453] Wed, 21 May 2008 21:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bernd Oliver Sünderhauf is currently offline Bernd Oliver SünderhaufFriend
Messages: 3
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Hi Roy,

Thanks for your comprehensive answer! I consider this a major step
towards active community interaction, if followed up by facts.

Roy Ganor wrote:
> Stabilizing PDT and improving its performance are absolutely in the
> center of our work toward PDT 1.0.3 and PDT 1.1, also we are working
> hard on defining a better API, which will be robust and adhere
> extensibility.
This is good news. I've seen all those open tickets in the queue that
prepare switching functionality to the new API models.

> Development is not slow, you can browse to http://www.ohloh.net/ and
> check out the contribution level which is very high.
Ohloh is a bit simplistic there. In the end, development speed can't be
measured in quantitative numbers of commits.
Some projects develop complete features or API rehauls in terms of a
patch rolling for months or even years and then commit it altogether (=1
commit). Other projects commit every little one-line-change (=1 commit)
instantly.
The "number of developers" in comparison to other projects is also
questionable, as Ohloh only knows about committers, not about those who
really developed the code. As the development processes differ
substantially, this says nothing, absolutely nothing about the real
developer base.

>> - Bugs filed by users usually don't receive a response for months.
>> - Feature requests usually never ever get a response. Even if there is
>> a chance that the proposed feature is taken into account, there is
>> simply no feedback.
>
> This section contradicts your first issue, we can't enhance it until the
> environment is stable and robust.

Can't see why this would contradict...
What I'm asking for is not that you'd throw in every new feature someone
suggests. Rather I'm asking for some feedback on every ticket. That
could be a short answer like:
"Great idea, would you please elaborate on the implementation!"
"Important stop-gap measure/round-up. Scheduled for nightly YYYYMMDD"
"Completely new feature. Scheduled for version x.y."
"Considered low priority. Left open to be reconsidered by 2008-12"
"Would be a duplication of xyz's functionality. Please use that."
"Bad idea. We don't want users to do that."
....

>> - Time schedules are not reliable at all (let's not talk about the
>> Ganymede Simultaneous Release...).
>
> We should deliver things on time - that's for sure. still when someone
> is popping out about a question about the road map we respond.
Would be so easy to remove the worng dates and state "It's ready when
it's ready!"

>> - Apart from the uncertainty, Integration releases are not published
>> regularly, and they are neither commented nor documented ("What's new"
>> etc.)
>
> I will try to set an automatic integration build which will deliver it
> each weekend.
Wow!

>> - Code changes by the Zend team are not discussed in Bugzilla tickets
>> but committed without further notice.
>
> We use pdt-dev mailing list to keep our developers updated. In the near
> future we will expose the new API for adopters in the Eclipse corner site.
Cool! I'm looking forward to that! Documentation and/or code commenting
is very much improvable.

>> This is the contrary to Open Source community-building. No one would
>> complain if the product were really good, but not even that is the case.
>> I can't help but this looks like Zend doesn't really want PDT to be a
>> major success.
>
> You saved the most important thing to the end :) I think that this issue
> summarises all of your sayings.
>
> Let's define the problem - in spite of the fact that we have a fabulous
> community of end-users, the code contribution made to Eclipse PDT is
> composed of 99% of Zend's stuff, and 1% from the outside world. This is
> not the diversity that open source project should have, but the fact is
> that there are no PHP developers that contribute to Eclipse PDT. For
> example, in the last EclipseCon I was amazed by the people contributing
> to JDT / WTP / EMF.
There are surely many reasons to this. Note that some other community
projects are taking great efforts to attract developers to participate.
Documentation and good APIs help, also a clear definition of the goals.
But the crucial aspects IMHO are a) actively invite people to help with
development and b) show them what they can do and how they can do it.

>> Please understand that my hard criticism does not mean that I don't
>> see the potential power of the PDT project. And yes, I'm using PDT! If
>> I wouldn't care, I would move on to PHPEclipse or use some dedicated
>> PHP Editor. I'm just expecting you to come off your high horse and see
>> us either as clients to compete for or as partners to work with.
>
> Any criticism is welcomed in the open source world but you can't really
> say it forever without even trying to help the development. We welcome
> anyone in the community to contribute and once things are tested we will
> be more than happy to join the contributor.
Be assured that I will actively support a PHP IDE on Eclipse. Apart from
some documentation, I'm planning to contribute a plugin for specific
Drupal support. The next weeks will show whether I'll support PDT or
PHPEclipse or (maybe) both.

> I don't want to sound like braggart but Eclipse PDT overcomes PHPEclipse
> in many ways (and Yes I am aware of their good progress), the first
> thing that make us better is that we are based on WTP that is a great
> framework for web development environment, the second is that we aligned
> with the Eclipse way that is important when working with Eclipse.
Noone says that PHPEclipse was *better* than PDT. I'd just say it's
coming close to PDT and has far more community potential. PDT on the
other side has the better framework to build on.

>> Regards, Pancho
>
> hope this answers your questions, you are more than welcome to resume
> criticise and ask more question :)
> - Roy
Sure. :)

- Pancho

P.S.: Note that the last three Nightlies didn't build for some reason...
Re: PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs) [message #71996 is a reply to message #71453] Sun, 25 May 2008 10:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
avalon is currently offline avalonFriend
Messages: 3
Registered: July 2009
Junior Member
Hi Roy,

i would like to just pick up one of the points Bernd stated:

> Also, compared to most successful Open Source projects, the cooperation
> between Senior developers and users that are willing to contribute is very
> poor:
> - Bugs filed by users usually don't receive a response for months.

The following is just one example (based on my own experience).

I have created the issue 178602 15 months ago. In the mean time other
people find that feature useful - even call it "a musthave for big
projects". Two other issues have been marked as duplicate (the only
response from the dev's).

Besides this there was no response from the dev's. Why should anybody
start some coding on this? It is not possible to know if someone has
already done some work on this, is currently doing something, how the
chances of future integration are or even if any developer is even aware
of this.

If just someone of the dev's would answer with something like "good idea,
currently no time for this, other things have higher priority, but if
someone can prove a patch we are willing to review and perhaps integrate
it into the next release". With this feedback someone might feel motivated
to spend some time on this.

I think the behavior of no response at all is what deters some of the
people willing to contribute.

Even since someone provided a patch for this two month ago, there was no
response of any kind. I doubt that this code (independently of it's code
quality - i haven't looked into it) would ever move from the bug system to
the code base.

May be the lack of communication must be resolved to encourage
contributions from the community?

Regards, Thomas
Re: PDT Bug Day (was Re: PDT (was Re: Dev2QA docs)) [message #72051 is a reply to message #71996] Tue, 27 May 2008 03:06 Go to previous message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: codeslave.ca.ibm.com

> If just someone of the dev's would answer with something like "good
> idea, currently no time for this, other things have higher priority, but
> if someone can prove a patch we are willing to review and perhaps
> integrate it into the next release". With this feedback someone might
> feel motivated to spend some time on this.
> I think the behavior of no response at all is what deters some of the
> people willing to contribute.
> Even since someone provided a patch for this two month ago, there was no
> response of any kind. I doubt that this code (independently of it's code
> quality - i haven't looked into it) would ever move from the bug system
> to the code base.

Agreed, silence on bugs and untended patches are certainly deterrents
from contribution.

However...

This Friday marks the inaugural PDT Bug Day [0], which includes the
following bugs [1] tagged by the PDT devs as being viable for community
contribution, according to the Bug Day guidelines.

Zend is clearly started a dialog with us, the community, about
soliciting input and contribution, and so the ball has begun to roll.

If you're keen to help out, please drop by #eclipse-bugs on Friday! For
more information, see the FAQ [2].

[0]http://wiki.eclipse.org/BugDay/May_2008
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advan ced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&c lassification=Tools&product=PDT&long_desc_type=allwo rdssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubst r&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubst r&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keyw ords=bugday&bug_severity=blocker&bug_severity=critic al&bug_severity=major&bug_severity=normal&bug_se verity=minor&bug_severity=trivial&bug_severity=enhan cement&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=s ubstring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&v otes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&a mp;cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&k nown_name=pdt_open_bugs&query_based_on=pdt_open_bugs& ;field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=
[2]http://wiki.eclipse.org/BugDay/FAQ


--
Nick Boldt :: Release Engineer, IBM Toronto Lab
Eclipse Modeling :: http://www.eclipse.org/modeling
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/User:Nickb
Previous Topic:Survey: Do you use the built-in html-css tools?
Next Topic:2 New Articles + PDT Bug Day
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Feb 05 15:35:22 GMT 2023

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 4.82299 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software

Back to the top