|Re: There is no stable version of eclipse in the future？ [message #1848657 is a reply to message #1848656]
||Mon, 13 December 2021 05:33
| Ed Merks
Registered: July 2009
That was the approach that was used a few years ago. There are definite advantages to the new approach:|
That being said, the older "maintenance stream approach" also had significant advantages, though primarily for the downstream consumers, i.e., providing also releases that include only bug fixes with the reduced the likelihood of regressions by avoiding the introduction of new features makes some consumers very happy.
But for the people providing both maintenance stream releases and development stream releases, many things are double the work. One typically needs two development environments, one for each of the two forks, so one needs to do pretty much everything twice...
Given there are a huge number of consumers, of course you can argue it would be best to provide both. But the vast majority of the huge number of consumers pay nothing, sponsor nothing, and contribution nothing while the small number of providers bear the entire burden. As it turns out, the small number of providers, being the ones who do all the work, are also the ones who make all the decisions, and that decision was to reduce the work load by focusing on a single development stream.
In the past, there was also a drive to provide Long Term Support versions, but again, funding that was problematic because mostly everyone wants and expects stuff for free and hopes someone else will bear the burden for all. The Eclipse IDE Working group might be able to revive such an idea, but not without a significant increase in members or sponsorship:
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.03111 seconds