Home » General (non-technical) » Eclipse Foundation » [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT !
| [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #3940] |
Fri, 15 October 2004 10:20  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
[followup to .foundation]
-
Please take 15 min. to read this carefully. This will save you most
possibly many time.
-
What is eclipse NOT.
eclipse is _not_ a no-cost production environment
- you have to get commercial plugins to make it work
- for Webdevelopement
- for Model Driven development
- for efficient crossplatform GUI design
- [...]
eclipse is not complete & mature WYSIWYG environment
- Visual GUI editors (VE project) are not mature
- Visual GUI editors do not work across platforms
- HTML / JSP and orther essential visual editors are not provided
- the UML2 project refers to the UML _model_
- a visual UML designer is not provided
eclipse is not a real cross-platform solution
- Windows NT and others are _not_ officially validated
- think twice if you want to validate such huge code-base yourself
- Several eclipse projects do not support e.g. Apple Mac.
eclipse is not a "write once run everywhere" solution
- the promise is not kept within eclipse
- you have possibly to create platform specific GUI code
- you have to provide different installations per platform
*RCP*
- inherits all described cross platform problems
*SWT*
eclipse is not an overall elegant and efficient design
- SWT (platform specific GUI) does not provide an efficient abstraction
layer
- you need to code platform dependent
- no framework is provided to encapsulate this task fully
- several projects suffer already from this (MAC incompatibility)
- SWT is organized as a component
- should be at minimum a subproject
*COMPATIBILITY*
eclipse JDT (Java Development Tools) are not fully compatible
- Eclipse own compiler is not fully compatible to official specs
- Feeback on compatibility issues is not treated in a special way
eclipse is not Java 5.0 capable
- many constructs of latest java release (1.5/5.0) were unsupported
- implementation will delay till 2nd or 3rd quarter of 2005
- although requested by community, adequate early support was not
provided
- depending users and even eclipse.projects suffer now from this
*GOVERNANCE*
eclipse is _not_ honest to new users
- Limitations are not stated clearly on the website
- Many time can be lost, until limitations are uncovered
eclipse foundation's board has _no_ user representatives.
eclipse governance is not transparent
- Board meetings and contents are not announced
- Board meeting _abridged_ minutes are published one month later.
- Staffing decisions (e.g. Webmasters) are kept behind the scenes.
- no further information given
- EMO (Eclipse Management Organization) is _invisible_ in its operation.
- critical feedback is many times ignored.
eclipse developement infrastructure is not really open
- no process defined for influence of voting on Issues
- many Issues are simply ignored.
- several procedures happen effectively 'undercover'
eclipse does not follow their governance and developement processes
- not all described processes are followed in practice
- no issue tracking category available to channelize complaints.
*WEBTEAM*
- the organizational unit "webteam" does not exist
- no issue tracking category available to channelize complaints.
- request to create category were simply _ignored_ by webmaster &
direction
*CONTROL*
eclipse has no decentralized control.
- The Platform Project has very much control.
- depending projects have no strictly defined process to influence
platform
- JDT subproject keeps many highly important subsystems.
- e.g. Compliler (which is at minimum a subproject)
- SWT subproject keeps many highly important subsystems.
- should be at minimum a subproject
*EFFICIENCY*
eclipse foundation is not fast and efficient
- User feedback is not processed immediately
- Even _critical_ issues (like privacy policy) are not processed
immediately
- most essential tasks (like newsgroup monitoring) are not ensured.
- simplest things, like an "office@eclipse.org" email are missing.
[...] (some more things)
*FINALE*
- I would not be able to work with a tool where the infrastructure is in
effect not working.
- I've suggested to assist the eclipse foundation practically as an
independent, with the goal of a >=5% efficiency increase within 3 months
from now.
- No answer.
-
- I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with such
irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has raised
due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy complaints)
- Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
The feedback/influence/contribution/information channels look much more
efficient @netbeans.org!
As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
-
If there is enouth interest, I will possibly write a more detailed report
about eclipse.
Please contact me via email.
Thank you!
-
-
-
Some History / Details:
After an initial compact review of netbeans/eclipse, I selected eclipse
for a deeper evaluation (based on a 'better feeling' that I had).
The things that give me an positive impression are finally the things that
make eclipse fail (SWT, Openness, Transparency, Independency, ...).
Many times expectations were raised based on marketing stuff, or simply
due to the need to find finally the so long awaited solution.
Of course a product cannot always fulfill this expectations in practice.
Same thing for Open Source Projects.
-
You will possibly read some replies on this message, which will state
rationales and justifications against my findings.
I can provide for nearly every statement one or more links within
eclipse.org.
But I am tired. I apologize for not making a detailed report.
The newsarchive of eclipse.org has a bad quality, but here are the links
to my messages:
http://eclipse.org/search/search.cgi?q=ilias%40lazaridis.com &ul=%2Fnewslists%2F&ps=20&m=all
-
I continue monitoring of eclipse.foundation for a while.
cu!
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #3956 is a reply to message #3940] |
Fri, 15 October 2004 12:44  |
 Marcus Olk
Messages: 130
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
ilias wrote:
> Please take 15 min. to read this carefully. This will save you most
> possibly many time.
This time has been wasted for me and this is my first and last
reaction...
> What is eclipse NOT.
[...]
I won't comment that pile of provocative statements, 'cos I simply
disagree with most of them and am definately not in the mood for
argumentation - I'm afraid it's not worth it. Sorry.
> *FINALE*
>
> - I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with
> such irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has
> raised due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy
> complaints)
A very good idea, honestly.
> - Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
Good luck and simply enjoy...
> As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
Yes, that's true, well at least some parts of it. And it is definately
not the case that it needs *much* higher quality. There are a couple of
flaws but all in all it's still a product that's fun to work with.
I tried to use FatBeans before...
> If there is enouth interest, I will possibly write a more detailed
> report about eclipse.
Thanks. But keep it please. You don't have to use Eclipse.
It's up to you. Have a good time using FatBeans...
> Thank you!
You're welcome.
> You will possibly read some replies on this message, which will state
> rationales and justifications against my findings.
I don't think so... time is crucial...
> But I am tired. I apologize for not making a detailed report.
I'm tired too - to read your postings. Sorry.
Marcus
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #3968 is a reply to message #3956] |
Fri, 15 October 2004 13:30 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: peter.cue.dk
This is not fair!
Ilias has used a lot of energy raising some questions about the quality
of the eclipse organisation. Some of his writings have had he tone of
rantings against the project leaders, but in most cases he has given new
ideas to how the problems could be solved. He is not to blame for the
fact that the organisation has ignored most of his ideas.
I have been following the Web Tools Project from its incarnation, and I
still don't have WYSIWYG Web Tools. This is my own fault of course,
since there has been no shortage of announcements from commercial
vendor(s) on the eclipse.webtools newsgroup.
Eclipse is a great project with lots of interesting frameworks like EMF,
GEF, UML2, GMT which could be used for making great tools for the
endusers, but most of these tools are unstable (eg. WTP, VE) in the
planning phase (eg. Pollinate) or there is not even a mentioning from
the eclipse board that it would be interesting to look at some time in
the distant future (UML tool).
I agree with Ilias, that at the moment NetBeans looks like the better
choice. The 4.0 betas are very promising, and if Ilias puts half as much
energy in the NetBeans project as he has in Eclipse, I can't wait for 4.1.
/Peter
Marcus Olk wrote:
> ilias wrote:
>
>> Please take 15 min. to read this carefully. This will save you most
>> possibly many time.
>
>
> This time has been wasted for me and this is my first and last
> reaction...
>
>> What is eclipse NOT.
>
> [...]
>
> I won't comment that pile of provocative statements, 'cos I simply
> disagree with most of them and am definately not in the mood for
> argumentation - I'm afraid it's not worth it. Sorry.
>
>> *FINALE*
>>
>> - I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with
>> such irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has
>> raised due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy
>> complaints)
>
>
> A very good idea, honestly.
>
>> - Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
>
>
> Good luck and simply enjoy...
>
>> As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
>
>
> Yes, that's true, well at least some parts of it. And it is definately
> not the case that it needs *much* higher quality. There are a couple of
> flaws but all in all it's still a product that's fun to work with.
> I tried to use FatBeans before...
>
>> If there is enouth interest, I will possibly write a more detailed
>> report about eclipse.
>
>
> Thanks. But keep it please. You don't have to use Eclipse.
> It's up to you. Have a good time using FatBeans...
>
>> Thank you!
>
>
> You're welcome.
>
>> You will possibly read some replies on this message, which will state
>> rationales and justifications against my findings.
>
>
> I don't think so... time is crucial...
>
>> But I am tired. I apologize for not making a detailed report.
>
>
> I'm tired too - to read your postings. Sorry.
>
> Marcus
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #3982 is a reply to message #3940] |
Fri, 15 October 2004 14:19 |
Jean Couillaud
Messages: 184
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Ilias,
Although some (I dont want to extend on the exact percentage, it's not
the point) of your points are right, I respecfully think you are missing
some major points that I will try to explain.
First, the eclipse.org foundation is not a charity business. Either you
accept the way it seems to work or you pay the fee to have a vote in
important decisions or you try to be heard by the right people in a way
that will not seem too rude (It is of no use to shout at directors
directly). You can not expect it (the foundation) to bow before you for
your newsposts and promote you in one week _because you seem to know
what you are talking about_.
Second, opening so much threads (interesting or not, again, that is not
my point) and waiting so little time for a detailed answer and a
reflexion leading to some interesting change, is quite surprising and
makes me question the fact that you already did such work in a
professionnal environment. If you really worked for 20 years in the IT
world, you should now that everyone has a pride and should be granted a
minimum amount of time to accept any failure.
Third, as convinced as you might be of the accuracy of your comments, it
might not be so obvious to people that matter (Namely: architecture
choices in eclipse). People spent a long time on it and you might have
missed some important points that encouraged them to think the
architecture as it is now. Maybe you could try to make more than mere
suggestions and try to be part of the project.
Fourth, as Marcus already told it, the situation is not that bad. It is
very easy to come from nowhere, analyze the situation, criticize it and
go away because none of your remarks are taken into account quickly
enough in your opinion. Usually, people behaving like that are
disregarded, plain and simple. In this case, it would be a shame since
some of your comments are worth reading.
I completly agree with the fact that there seems to be some problems
with the eclipse foundation and the EMO (but I will come back on this
later), but if you really want to help, I think you should stop
criticizing people because the changes you _demand_ are not done quickly
enough and try to do it _the open source way_ (as some other eclipse
members do):
Modify the parts you think should be modified, communicate on your
efforts during the process to avoid your contribution to be unusable at
the end, and see if your work is appreciated (you could even sell it at
some point).
To tell a bit more about the foundation (it is a bit off topic, sorry).
I have the impression that the foundation has a problem: On one hand, it
tries to attract open source people, on the other hand, it tries to
attract commercial entities to back it up financially. It seems to
desire to work as in an open source project, but it finds it really
difficult to do it without putting aside its commercial backers.
On one hand, it provides a way for the community to influence
development, make choices, on the other hand, it seems it tries to
preserve the influence of its biggest members. I feel the eclipse
foudation's biggest problem IMHO is about money, which is kind of paradoxal.
Fifth, back on topic, you might be a genius in terms of management, Java
and Webbased development, and quality assurance, but you can not truly
expect the foundation to listen to every single person in the community
who thinks he detains the real knowledge, and apply the changes he
_demands_ immediatly.
Instead, I trully advise you to stay in the community (it is a trully
great community and a trully great topic), and help do the necessary
changes. Sorry for being rude, but it seems to me it is a bit weak, if
not childish, to post 4-5 comments on this newsgroup in 4-5 days and
leave the community with so much fuss because no director answered you
directly to tell you that your comments have been heard and that
modifications will be done immediatly.
Respectfully,
Jean
ilias wrote:
> [followup to .foundation]
>
> -
>
> Please take 15 min. to read this carefully. This will save you most
> possibly many time.
>
> -
>
> What is eclipse NOT.
>
> eclipse is _not_ a no-cost production environment
> - you have to get commercial plugins to make it work
> - for Webdevelopement
> - for Model Driven development
> - for efficient crossplatform GUI design
> - [...]
>
> eclipse is not complete & mature WYSIWYG environment
> - Visual GUI editors (VE project) are not mature
> - Visual GUI editors do not work across platforms
> - HTML / JSP and orther essential visual editors are not provided
> - the UML2 project refers to the UML _model_
> - a visual UML designer is not provided
>
> eclipse is not a real cross-platform solution
> - Windows NT and others are _not_ officially validated
> - think twice if you want to validate such huge code-base yourself
> - Several eclipse projects do not support e.g. Apple Mac.
>
> eclipse is not a "write once run everywhere" solution
> - the promise is not kept within eclipse
> - you have possibly to create platform specific GUI code
> - you have to provide different installations per platform
>
>
> *RCP*
> - inherits all described cross platform problems
>
>
> *SWT*
>
> eclipse is not an overall elegant and efficient design
> - SWT (platform specific GUI) does not provide an efficient
> abstraction layer
> - you need to code platform dependent
> - no framework is provided to encapsulate this task fully
> - several projects suffer already from this (MAC incompatibility)
> - SWT is organized as a component
> - should be at minimum a subproject
>
>
> *COMPATIBILITY*
>
> eclipse JDT (Java Development Tools) are not fully compatible
> - Eclipse own compiler is not fully compatible to official specs
> - Feeback on compatibility issues is not treated in a special way
>
> eclipse is not Java 5.0 capable
> - many constructs of latest java release (1.5/5.0) were unsupported
> - implementation will delay till 2nd or 3rd quarter of 2005
> - although requested by community, adequate early support was not
> provided
> - depending users and even eclipse.projects suffer now from this
>
>
>
> *GOVERNANCE*
>
> eclipse is _not_ honest to new users
> - Limitations are not stated clearly on the website
> - Many time can be lost, until limitations are uncovered
>
> eclipse foundation's board has _no_ user representatives.
>
> eclipse governance is not transparent
> - Board meetings and contents are not announced
> - Board meeting _abridged_ minutes are published one month later.
> - Staffing decisions (e.g. Webmasters) are kept behind the scenes.
> - no further information given
> - EMO (Eclipse Management Organization) is _invisible_ in its operation.
> - critical feedback is many times ignored.
>
> eclipse developement infrastructure is not really open
> - no process defined for influence of voting on Issues
> - many Issues are simply ignored.
> - several procedures happen effectively 'undercover'
>
> eclipse does not follow their governance and developement processes
> - not all described processes are followed in practice
> - no issue tracking category available to channelize complaints.
>
>
>
> *WEBTEAM*
>
> - the organizational unit "webteam" does not exist
> - no issue tracking category available to channelize complaints.
> - request to create category were simply _ignored_ by webmaster &
> direction
>
>
>
> *CONTROL*
>
> eclipse has no decentralized control.
> - The Platform Project has very much control.
> - depending projects have no strictly defined process to influence
> platform
> - JDT subproject keeps many highly important subsystems.
> - e.g. Compliler (which is at minimum a subproject)
> - SWT subproject keeps many highly important subsystems.
> - should be at minimum a subproject
>
>
>
> *EFFICIENCY*
>
> eclipse foundation is not fast and efficient
> - User feedback is not processed immediately
> - Even _critical_ issues (like privacy policy) are not processed
> immediately
> - most essential tasks (like newsgroup monitoring) are not ensured.
> - simplest things, like an "office@eclipse.org" email are missing.
>
> [...] (some more things)
>
>
> *FINALE*
>
> - I would not be able to work with a tool where the infrastructure is
> in effect not working.
> - I've suggested to assist the eclipse foundation practically as an
> independent, with the goal of a >=5% efficiency increase within 3
> months from now.
> - No answer.
>
> -
>
> - I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with
> such irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has
> raised due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy
> complaints)
>
> - Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
>
> The feedback/influence/contribution/information channels look much more
> efficient @netbeans.org!
>
> As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
>
> -
>
> If there is enouth interest, I will possibly write a more detailed
> report about eclipse.
>
> Please contact me via email.
>
> Thank you!
>
> -
> -
> -
>
> Some History / Details:
>
> After an initial compact review of netbeans/eclipse, I selected
> eclipse for a deeper evaluation (based on a 'better feeling' that I had).
>
> The things that give me an positive impression are finally the things
> that make eclipse fail (SWT, Openness, Transparency, Independency, ...).
>
> Many times expectations were raised based on marketing stuff, or simply
> due to the need to find finally the so long awaited solution.
>
> Of course a product cannot always fulfill this expectations in practice.
>
> Same thing for Open Source Projects.
>
> -
>
> You will possibly read some replies on this message, which will state
> rationales and justifications against my findings.
>
> I can provide for nearly every statement one or more links within
> eclipse.org.
>
> But I am tired. I apologize for not making a detailed report.
>
> The newsarchive of eclipse.org has a bad quality, but here are the
> links to my messages:
>
> http://eclipse.org/search/search.cgi?q=ilias%40lazaridis.com &ul=%2Fnewslists%2F&ps=20&m=all
>
>
> -
>
> I continue monitoring of eclipse.foundation for a while.
>
> cu!
>
> .
>
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #4468 is a reply to message #3940] |
Sat, 16 October 2004 05:54 |
Eric Clayberg
Messages: 979
Registered: July 2009
Location: Boston, MA |
Senior Member |
|
|
"ilias" <ilias@lazaridis.com> wrote in message
news:opsfwpoagrrp2aut@news.eclipse.org...
>
> eclipse is _not_ a no-cost production environment
Nothing is truly "no-cost".
> eclipse is not a "write once run everywhere" solution
And neither is Java in general.
> eclipse is not an overall elegant and efficient design
I couldn't disagree more. I find the design of Eclipse to be quite elegant
and efficient. I have been using Eclipse and SWT full time now for nearly
five years, and I used its predecessors from IBM for a nearly a decade
before that. Eclipse is the crowning achievement of one of the world's
greatest OO engineering groups (IBM's OTI Labs). It is extremely well
architected and extremely well engineered, and something that IBM and the
Eclipse community should be very proud of.
> eclipse foundation is not fast and efficient
> - User feedback is not processed immediately
Translation: they aren't doing back flips to respond to your every whim.
Mike has been doing a superb job in responding to you and keeping his cool
in the face of your continual provocations.
If you want them (or anyone) to pay any attention to you, you need to focus
your energies on one or two specific issues and work to address them. Your
(12 gauge) shotgun approach to criticizing everything in sight has resulted
in the good ideas that you have (and you do have some good ideas) being lost
in the noise.
> - I've suggested to assist the eclipse foundation practically as an
> independent, with the goal of a >=5% efficiency increase within 3 months
> from now.
> - No answer.
So...you offered your services to the Eclipse Foundation as a consultant to
improve their efficiency by *5%* and you didn't get an answer. Hmmm. Are you
honestly surprised by that? You've certainly got some brass ones, I'll grant
you that.
Here's a suggestion: leave them alone for awhile and you will improve their
efficiency by ay least 5% right off the bat.
> - I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with such
> irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has raised
> due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy complaints)
Unfortunately, your level of aggression has been quite apparent, and it has
all but drowned out any good suggestions that you have offered.
> - Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
OK, that works for me. I'm sure they will be much more appreciative of your
efforts.
> The feedback/influence/contribution/information channels look much more
> efficient @netbeans.org!
In that case, feel free to make liberal use of them.
> As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
The product should have a much higher quality? While it isn't perfect, it
already has an exceptional level of quality. Eclipse is now the dominant
player in the Java IDE market for very good reason.
-Eric
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #4608 is a reply to message #3982] |
Sat, 16 October 2004 18:17 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:19:27 +0200, Jean Couillaud <couillaud@fimasys.fr>
wrote:
> Ilias,
>
> Although some (I dont want to extend on the exact percentage, it's not
> the point) of your points are right,
Intuitive guess: >= 90% .
Faults of <= 10% [most possibly based on false informations within
eclipse.org]
> I respecfully think you are missingsome major points that I will try to
> explain.
I am eager to detect my failure.
> First, the eclipse.org foundation is not a charity business. Either you
> accept the way it seems to work or you pay the fee to have a vote in
> important decisions or you try to be heard by the right people in a way
> that will not seem too rude (It is of no use to shout at directors
> directly).
I did not shout to anyone !
[_slightly_ in the privacy case, a right which anyone should grant me]
> You can not expect it (the foundation) to bow before you for your
> newsposts and promote you in one week _because you seem to know what you
> are talking about_.
I'm since 7 weeks here.
> Second, opening so much threads (interesting or not, again, that is not
> my point) and waiting so little time for a detailed answer and a
> reflexion leading to some interesting change, is quite surprising and
> makes me question the fact that you already did such work in a
> professionnal environment.
The threads within this group are my summarized suggestions/findings.
[please note that most of the research was done within eclipse.platform
and other groups within the last 7 weeks].
> If you really worked for 20 years in the IT world,
18 years.
> you should now that everyone has a pride and should be granted a minimum
> amount of time to accept any failure.
Of course I know that.
But!
Delayed "failure-acceptance" reduce system efficiency.
It can force a system to malfunction.
It can force a system to collapse.
And it can reduce system evolution speed.
Evaluation of the "failure-acceptance-speed" helps rating the qualities of
a project.
[btw: Low Egoism => Free Rationality => High Failure-Acceptance-Speed]
> Third, as convinced as you might be of the accuracy of your comments, it
> might not be so obvious to people that matter (Namely: architecture
> choices in eclipse). People spent a long time on it and you might have
> missed some important points that encouraged them to think the
> architecture as it is now.
This is not relevant.
I rate parts of the architecture from a users point of view.
The architecture has failed to abstract essential constructs of the design,
resulting in suffering teams and users.
This is most possibly _not_ the failure of the architecture people.
I'm afraid it is most possibly not the failure of anyone.
[no time to evaluate deeper]
> Maybe you could try to make more than mere suggestions and try to be
> part of the project.
I am still part of the project.
I cannot be continously part of the project, as I am an independent.
[Most of the key eclipse postitions and even contributors are employed
somewhere.]
> Fourth, as Marcus already told it, the situation is not that bad. It is
> very easy to come from nowhere, analyze the situation, criticize it and
> go away because none of your remarks are taken into account quickly
> enough in your opinion.
False summary based on false facts/assumtions.
> Usually, people behaving like that are disregarded, plain and simple.
poor souls [show patience - may one day it's you.]
[btw: a "disregarded" must not be "plain and simple"]
> In this case, it would be a shame since some of your comments are worth
> reading.
My comments/suggestions are interconnected and based on the same
directives.
If you like one, you will most possibly like them all.
> I completly agree with the fact that there seems to be some problems
> with the eclipse foundation and the EMO (but I will come back on this
> later), but if you really want to help, I think you should stop
> criticizing people because the changes you _demand_ are not done quickly
> enough and try to do it _the open source way_ (as some other eclipse
> members do):
False summary based on false facts/assumtions [demand, speed]
-
I've contributed the Open Source way.
I've contributed an 'live analysis', context potential user, newsgroup,
bugtracking, process, foundation, governance, projects, ...
I've spend 10 to 15 hours per day in documents, analytical discussions
etc, whilst trying to detect and follow the defined processes.
I've done this the last 7 weeks and have invested around 400 hours
[additionally: an initial visit a few months ago, don't know exactly how
many hours].
Most possibly I know many parts of the eclipse foundation better than a
high percentage of long-term contributors.
> Modify the parts you think should be modified, communicate on your
> efforts during the process to avoid your contribution to be unusable at
> the end, and see if your work is appreciated (you could even sell it at
> some point).
I cannot dive into the sourcecode base in such an weak infrastructure,
especially due to the missing efficient influence/modification mechanisms.
> To tell a bit more about the foundation (it is a bit off topic, sorry).
> I have the impression that the foundation has a problem: On one hand, it
> tries to attract open source people, on the other hand, it tries to
> attract commercial entities to back it up financially. It seems to
> desire to work as in an open source project, but it finds it really
> difficult to do it without putting aside its commercial backers.
> On one hand, it provides a way for the community to influence
> development, make choices, on the other hand, it seems it tries to
> preserve the influence of its biggest members. I feel the eclipse
> foudation's biggest problem IMHO is about money, which is kind of
> paradoxal.
The 2004 budget has a surplus of $400.000 .
So money seems fine.
> Fifth, back on topic, you might be a genius in terms of management, Java
> and Webbased development, and quality assurance, but you can not truly
> expect the foundation to listen to every single person in the community
> who thinks he detains the real knowledge,
> and apply the changes he _demands_ immediatly.
I did not expect that.
-
and: A foundation/company which misses to detect, listen to and finally
_bind_ a genious that you describe, has a most possibly a very deep
problem.
[btw: I'm not the described genious. I've e.g. no idea about Java and
Webbased developement. I'll most possibly start with java 5.0, metadata
and beehive _and_ most importantly with something that you all have lost
years ago: a java virgin mind]
> Instead, I trully advise you to stay in the community (it is a trully
> great community and a trully great topic), and help do the necessary
> changes.
I would love to continue the process, but I depend currently on the
incomings of my independent services.
> Sorry for being rude,
you are not rude, but very friendly.
> but it seems to me it is a bit weak, if not childish, to post 4-5
> comments on this newsgroup in 4-5 days and leave the community with so
> much fuss because no director answered you directly to tell you that
> your comments have been heard and that modifications will be done
> immediatly.
As stated above, I am since 7 weeks within eclipse.org, and the threads
are essentially the summary of my evaluation.
And: the director answered more than I've expected. I don't think that
he his responsible for having more tasks to do than he can fulfill.
It's either EMO's or the Board's responsibility to provide a secretary.
The director should focus on the high level tasks.
> Respectfully,
>
> Jean
-
Thank you!
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #4677 is a reply to message #4468] |
Sat, 16 October 2004 23:10 |
Genady Beryozkin
Messages: 410
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
I will only add that I do find Eclipse and JDT exemplary in many aspects
of design
and implementation. It happens that some of the implementations are
missing, inefficient and/or buggy.
In such case opening a bug helps much more than posting 10 criticizing
messages.
I would suggest the comparison with the development of the Java language
itself. Sun governs
the language, Sun seldom listens to developers and money plays a lot
more significant role there.
Unfortunately I also don't expect Sun developers monitoring all the
forums and answering
developers questions (there are exceptions though) as it happens with
Eclipse.
In Russian there is a saying - "The man who pays the money gets to
choose the music", and it applies to Eclipse as
well. Still, I feel my voice is heard here more than it would be with
Java itself (although I had to write the RMI support myself :)
Genady
Eric Clayberg wrote:
>"ilias" <ilias@lazaridis.com> wrote in message
>news:opsfwpoagrrp2aut@news.eclipse.org...
>
>
>>eclipse is _not_ a no-cost production environment
>>
>>
>
>Nothing is truly "no-cost".
>
>
>
>>eclipse is not a "write once run everywhere" solution
>>
>>
>
>And neither is Java in general.
>
>
>
>>eclipse is not an overall elegant and efficient design
>>
>>
>
>I couldn't disagree more. I find the design of Eclipse to be quite elegant
>and efficient. I have been using Eclipse and SWT full time now for nearly
>five years, and I used its predecessors from IBM for a nearly a decade
>before that. Eclipse is the crowning achievement of one of the world's
>greatest OO engineering groups (IBM's OTI Labs). It is extremely well
>architected and extremely well engineered, and something that IBM and the
>Eclipse community should be very proud of.
>
>
>
>>eclipse foundation is not fast and efficient
>> - User feedback is not processed immediately
>>
>>
>
>Translation: they aren't doing back flips to respond to your every whim.
>
>Mike has been doing a superb job in responding to you and keeping his cool
>in the face of your continual provocations.
>
>If you want them (or anyone) to pay any attention to you, you need to focus
>your energies on one or two specific issues and work to address them. Your
>(12 gauge) shotgun approach to criticizing everything in sight has resulted
>in the good ideas that you have (and you do have some good ideas) being lost
>in the noise.
>
>
>
>>- I've suggested to assist the eclipse foundation practically as an
>>independent, with the goal of a >=5% efficiency increase within 3 months
>> from now.
>>- No answer.
>>
>>
>
>So...you offered your services to the Eclipse Foundation as a consultant to
>improve their efficiency by *5%* and you didn't get an answer. Hmmm. Are you
>honestly surprised by that? You've certainly got some brass ones, I'll grant
>you that.
>
>Here's a suggestion: leave them alone for awhile and you will improve their
>efficiency by ay least 5% right off the bat.
>
>
>
>>- I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with such
>>irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has raised
>>due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy complaints)
>>
>>
>
>Unfortunately, your level of aggression has been quite apparent, and it has
>all but drowned out any good suggestions that you have offered.
>
>
>
>>- Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
>>
>>
>
>OK, that works for me. I'm sure they will be much more appreciative of your
>efforts.
>
>
>
>>The feedback/influence/contribution/information channels look much more
>>efficient @netbeans.org!
>>
>>
>
>In that case, feel free to make liberal use of them.
>
>
>
>>As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
>>
>>
>
>The product should have a much higher quality? While it isn't perfect, it
>already has an exceptional level of quality. Eclipse is now the dominant
>player in the Java IDE market for very good reason.
>
>-Eric
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #4953 is a reply to message #4468] |
Mon, 18 October 2004 13:17 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
[note to readers: nearly everything is usefull, including replies which do
not respect "original content". This message is a nice example to showcase
commonly used rejoinder mechanisms]
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 01:54:40 -0400, Eric Clayberg
<clayberg@instantiations.com> wrote:
> "ilias" <ilias@lazaridis.com> wrote in message
> news:opsfwpoagrrp2aut@news.eclipse.org...
>>
>> eclipse is _not_ a no-cost production environment
>
> Nothing is truly "no-cost".
[isolate statement from rationales, counter with a generalisation]
>> eclipse is not a "write once run everywhere" solution
>
> And neither is Java in general.
[isolate statement from rationales, counter with a generalisation]
>> eclipse is not an overall elegant and efficient design
>
> I couldn't disagree more. I find the design of Eclipse to be quite
> elegant
> and efficient. I have been using Eclipse and SWT full time now for nearly
> five years, and I used its predecessors from IBM for a nearly a decade
> before that. Eclipse is the crowning achievement of one of the world's
> greatest OO engineering groups (IBM's OTI Labs). It is extremely well
> architected and extremely well engineered, and something that IBM and the
> Eclipse community should be very proud of.
[isolate statement from rationales, counter with some impressive
historical background ans some marketing stuff]
>> eclipse foundation is not fast and efficient
>> - User feedback is not processed immediately
>
> Translation: they aren't doing back flips to respond to your every whim.
[isolate statement from rationales, counter with some funny comments ]
> Mike has been doing a superb job in responding to you and keeping his
> cool in the face of your continual provocations.
[ changing context: declare criticism as personal, declare criticism as
personal provocations, protect person in a personal tone]
[ clarification: my criticism targets effectively the EMO and most of all
the eclipse Board, which is the final responsible for the current
situation within the eclipse foundation]
> If you want them (or anyone) to pay any attention to you, you need to
> focus
> your energies on one or two specific issues and work to address them.
[make some suggestions in a slight didactical tone (even if suggesting the
status-quo)]
> Your (12 gauge) shotgun approach to criticizing everything in sight has
[funny comments ]
> resulted
> in the good ideas that you have (and you do have some good ideas) being
> lost in the noise.
[give a positive point, to avoid looking to negative]
>> - I've suggested to assist the eclipse foundation practically as an
>> independent, with the goal of a >=5% efficiency increase within 3 months
>> from now.
>> - No answer.
>
> So...you offered your services to the Eclipse Foundation as a consultant
> to improve their efficiency by *5%* and you didn't get an answer. Hmmm.
> Are you honestly surprised by that? You've certainly got some brass
> ones, I'll grant you that.
[fun, fun, fun]
[btw: I got an answer]
> Here's a suggestion: leave them alone for awhile and you will improve
> their efficiency by ay least 5% right off the bat.
[and more fun]
>> - I close the eclipse case now quickly, as I cannot deal anymore with
>> such
>> irrationality and inefficiency (apology! my aggression level has raised
>> due to several unanswered issues, including privacy policy complaints)
>
> Unfortunately, your level of aggression has been quite apparent, and it
[isolate a self stated negative property, move it out of context,
strenghten its appearance and...]
> has all but drowned out any good suggestions that you have offered.
[...connect it as negatively influencing a "positive point given"]
>> - Moving on to NetBeans.org now, picking it, starting to work.
>
> OK, that works for me. I'm sure they will be much more appreciative of
> your efforts.
[this here is to sad to comment.]
>> The feedback/influence/contribution/information channels look much more
>> efficient @netbeans.org!
>
> In that case, feel free to make liberal use of them.
[again, to sad to comment]
>> As a conclusion, the product should have a much higher quality.
>
> The product should have a much higher quality? While it isn't perfect, it
> already has an exceptional level of quality. Eclipse is now the dominant
> player in the Java IDE market for very good reason.
[switch context (quality statement referes to netBeans, the comment to
eclipse]
-
Please show at least respect against "original content".
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
| |
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #5410 is a reply to message #4677] |
Mon, 18 October 2004 14:50 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:10:15 +0200, Genady <eclipse@genady.org> wrote:
> I will only add that I do find Eclipse and JDT exemplary in many aspects
> of design and implementation.
I've criticized JDT compatibility issues and compatibility issues
processing.
> It happens that some of the implementations are missing, inefficient
> and/or buggy.
of course.
> In such case opening a bug helps much more than posting 10 criticizing
> messages.
I accept bets.
> I would suggest the comparison with the development of the Java language
> itself.
[...]
No need to compare with a language.
netBeans would be the fairply comparison.
> In Russian there is a saying - "The man who pays the money gets to
> choose the music",
Many times the man pays the money, the jockey chooses the music (which the
_people_ enjoy).
> and it applies to Eclipse as well.
yes.
"which the _people_ enjoy"
> Still, I feel my voice is heard here more than it would be with Java
> itself (although I had to write the RMI support myself :)
As stated before: a comparison would be "netbeans.org".
-
I like eclipse.
As I like netbeans.
(still like eclipse more, don't know why)
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
| | | | | |
| Re: [NEWCOMER] - Evaluation Summary: What is Eclipse NOT ! [message #8117 is a reply to message #3968] |
Sun, 12 December 2004 16:30 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ilias.lazaridis.com
Peter Stricker wrote:
> This is not fair!
>
> Ilias has used a lot of energy raising some questions about the quality
> of the eclipse organisation. Some of his writings have had he tone of
> rantings against the project leaders, but in most cases he has given new
> ideas to how the problems could be solved. He is not to blame for the
> fact that the organisation has ignored most of his ideas.
[I'll answer around 2 months later]
Thank you for your support.
> I have been following the Web Tools Project from its incarnation, and I
[...]
> Eclipse is a great project with lots of interesting frameworks like EMF,
[...]
> I agree with Ilias, that at the moment NetBeans looks like the better
> choice. The 4.0 betas are very promising, and if Ilias puts half as much
> energy in the NetBeans project as he has in Eclipse, I can't wait for 4.1.
After around 2 months I like to tell you, that I've invested even more
energy in the NetBeans project.
I was disapointed from Eclipse.
And this was partly caused due to the much more liberal, open and
independent looking NetBeans Project.
But:
NetBeans is a _shame_ for the whole java-community:
Sun Microsystems Employees apply *censorship* on the NetBeans forums
[either whilst abusing their power or on behalf of their
Managers/Executives]:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.softwaret ools/browse_frm/thread/93b90d984c64ae76/6ae81d9ae5fac267
-
The Eclipse Foundation and its Community will hopefully never make the
same mistakes.
-
Once more, thank you for your support.
..
--
http://lazaridis.com
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Apr 23 17:57:00 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03843 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
