|
Re: Are Subclipse still involved? [message #8503 is a reply to message #8473] |
Mon, 06 August 2007 13:09 |
|
They decided to withdraw their proposal. You can read the reasons behind
the decision here:
http://subclipse.tigris.org/eclipse-proposal.html
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
Phillip Beauvoir wrote:
> I'm investigating this Eclipse SVN integration project... According to
> earlier posts in this newgroups it was supposed to be a collaboration
> between the Subclipse and Subversive teams. Why is it called
> "Subversive project"? What happened to Subclipse? Did they pull out?
>
> PB
>
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Are Subclipse still involved? [message #8841 is a reply to message #8830] |
Fri, 10 August 2007 08:57 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: paul.mcconkey.net
"Paul Glezen" <pglezen@us.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:f9gpcg$f9k$1@build.eclipse.org...
>I don't hold against Subversive the fact that it originated from a single
>commercial company. After all, Eclipse itself came from a single
>commercial company.
Of course it should not be a problem that a single commercial company is
promoting an Eclipse plugin. What is a little more serious is that Polarion
did not manage to create a version compatible with Eclipse 3.3 and Mylin 2.0
until some time after the Europa release date. Presumably they did not have
resources available to track the milestone releases although the Subclipse
project did manage to keep up.
This single fact meant that I returned to Subclipse, having intended to use
the 'official' SVN client. As Subclipse works for me, I'm unlikely to change
back.
Paul.
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03703 seconds