Home » Language IDEs » PHP Development Tools (PDT) » What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?
| What has happened to the size of the All-In-One? [message #86243] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 06:42  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: spam.networks.fi
Hi,
I just noticed that the size of all in one package has gone up from M2's
110MB to RC1's 310MB. What has happened? At the first sight one could
suggest that all-in-one packaging script has a bug or then we have new
massive depencies.
-jasmo
|
|
| |
| Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One? [message #86333 is a reply to message #86288] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 15:13  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nickboldt+eclipse+newsgroup.gmail.com
For the moment, the All-In-Ones for PDT 2.0 contain *everything* fed
into the build.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Modeling_Project_Releng/Building/All -In-Ones
If someone wants to contribute a better solution, I'll be happy to
switch to that. One variation on the current situation which can be
implemented today w/o any coding changes would be to build PDT using
runtimes instead of SDKs, so that the all-in-ones would be assembled
from smaller inputs.
The best solution, IMHO, is for PDT to commit to being part of 2009's
Galileo release [1], so that instead of home-grown bundles, they can
take advantage of EPP [2]. If you feel this would be the best approach,
please vote for bug 238960 [3]. We need the community (that's you!) to
show the EPP project and the Planning Council that a PHP Developer
Package is wanted & warranted. We also need the community to speak up
and ask PDT to be in Galileo, so it can benefit from being delivered in
concert with Eclipse 3.5, WTP 3.1 and DLTK 1.0.
[1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Galileo
[2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/EPP/How_to_create_a_package
[3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=238960
Jim Kremens wrote:
> "What has happened? At the first sight one could
> suggest that all-in-one packaging script has a bug or then we have new
> massive depencies. '
>
> This was covered in previous posts. The plugin now includes all
> dependencies.
> FWIW, PDT does have massive dependencies. For Eclipse users who don't
> already have all of the dependencies listed here
> ( http://dev.eclipse.org/newslists/news.eclipse.tools.pdt/msg0 2653.html), PDT is (or was) a real
> challenge to install. Remembering that these users are ideally PHP
> developers and not Eclipse developers, making it easier for them can only
> be a good thing. I think they're less likely to care how many k the
> plugin is if it will actually work 'out of the box' when they install it.
> Jim
>
> Jasmo Hiltula <spam@networks.fi> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just noticed that the size of all in one package has gone up from M2's
>> 110MB to RC1's 310MB. What has happened? At the first sight one could
>> suggest that all-in-one packaging script has a bug or then we have new
>> massive depencies.
>>
>> -jasmo
>
>
>
--
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb
|
|
|
| Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One? [message #86344 is a reply to message #86333] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 15:41 |
 Jorrit Schippers
Messages: 26
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Nick Boldt wrote:
> For the moment, the All-In-Ones for PDT 2.0 contain *everything* fed
> into the build.
>
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Modeling_Project_Releng/Building/All -In-Ones
>
> If someone wants to contribute a better solution, I'll be happy to
> switch to that. One variation on the current situation which can be
> implemented today w/o any coding changes would be to build PDT using
> runtimes instead of SDKs, so that the all-in-ones would be assembled
> from smaller inputs.
>
> The best solution, IMHO, is for PDT to commit to being part of 2009's
> Galileo release [1], so that instead of home-grown bundles, they can
> take advantage of EPP [2]. If you feel this would be the best approach,
> please vote for bug 238960 [3]. We need the community (that's you!) to
> show the EPP project and the Planning Council that a PHP Developer
> Package is wanted & warranted. We also need the community to speak up
> and ask PDT to be in Galileo, so it can benefit from being delivered in
> concert with Eclipse 3.5, WTP 3.1 and DLTK 1.0.
>
> [1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Galileo
> [2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/EPP/How_to_create_a_package
> [3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=238960
>
An PDT EPP would be great! It should then be decided what other features
might be useful to include in this release. My personal vote goes to
Mylyn and Subversive. Perhaps add some web development things as well,
they might be useful to others.
Are there statistics about what other features are commonly used by
people that also use PDT?
--
Jorrit
|
|
|
| Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86370 is a reply to message #86344] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 16:18 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nickboldt+eclipse+newsgroup.gmail.com
> An PDT EPP would be great! It should then be decided what other features
> might be useful to include in this release. My personal vote goes to
> Mylyn and Subversive. Perhaps add some web development things as well,
> they might be useful to others.
> Are there statistics about what other features are commonly used by
> people that also use PDT?
+1 for Mylyn
-1 for Subversive due to license issues. I believe you can't actually
get complete support for SVN without updating from a non-Eclipse site
(Polarion or Tigris), with non-EPL'd code.
If you'd like to put up a poll somewhere (surveymonkey, etc.) I think
this question deserves some community feedback. For example, should the
PHP Dev package include:
* Mylyn
* DLTK stuff other than the core framework (eg., Ruby?)
* XSL Tools (for xsl dev/debugging)
* JSDT (for javascript dev/debugging)
.... or just stick w/ PDT SDK + WTP runtime + DLTK runtime, in order to
keep the package relatively small?
--
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb
|
|
| |
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86397 is a reply to message #86370] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 16:30 |
Jorrit Schippers
Messages: 26
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Nick Boldt wrote:
>> An PDT EPP would be great! It should then be decided what other features
>> might be useful to include in this release. My personal vote goes to
>> Mylyn and Subversive. Perhaps add some web development things as well,
>> they might be useful to others.
>> Are there statistics about what other features are commonly used by
>> people that also use PDT?
>
> +1 for Mylyn
>
> -1 for Subversive due to license issues. I believe you can't actually
> get complete support for SVN without updating from a non-Eclipse site
> (Polarion or Tigris), with non-EPL'd code.
>
> If you'd like to put up a poll somewhere (surveymonkey, etc.) I think
> this question deserves some community feedback. For example, should the
> PHP Dev package include:
>
> * Mylyn
> * DLTK stuff other than the core framework (eg., Ruby?)
> * XSL Tools (for xsl dev/debugging)
> * JSDT (for javascript dev/debugging)
>
> ... or just stick w/ PDT SDK + WTP runtime + DLTK runtime, in order to
> keep the package relatively small?
>
Including the parts of Subversive that do not have IP issues could be
considered perhaps? After all, it's an Eclipse project. Instructions to
retrieve the SVN connectors from the Polarion website could be included
in the package.
I think it is better to wait for other suggestions from people in this
newsgroup in order to make a list of possibilities.
When looking at for instance the J2EE package, I see that there are
quite a few other features included, such as XML tools, RSE and PDE. I
think it is safe to include some other features. After all, it should be
an entry level package that does not require installing more features
for most of the users. The all-in-one package that we know today could
then take the role of absolute-minimum package.
I can't wait until the day that http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/
contains a link with the text "Eclipse IDE for PHP Developers"
--
Jorrit
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86411 is a reply to message #86397] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 17:23 |
Jim Kremens
Messages: 8
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Just as a general concept, I don't think there's any value in trying to
keep the package small. Developers use high bandwidth connections, and
the difference between 100k and 300k on a real connection is negligible.
What's important is getting a package that works without having to go
hunting for obscure dependencies, which is no fun at all, and probably
has prevented lots of developers from even using PDT...
Jim
Jorrit Schippers <eclipsebugs@ncode.nl> wrote:
>Nick Boldt wrote:
>>> An PDT EPP would be great! It should then be decided what other features
>>> might be useful to include in this release. My personal vote goes to
>>> Mylyn and Subversive. Perhaps add some web development things as well,
>>> they might be useful to others.
>>> Are there statistics about what other features are commonly used by
>>> people that also use PDT?
>>
>> +1 for Mylyn
>>
>> -1 for Subversive due to license issues. I believe you can't actually
>> get complete support for SVN without updating from a non-Eclipse site
>> (Polarion or Tigris), with non-EPL'd code.
>>
>> If you'd like to put up a poll somewhere (surveymonkey, etc.) I think
>> this question deserves some community feedback. For example, should the
>> PHP Dev package include:
>>
>> * Mylyn
>> * DLTK stuff other than the core framework (eg., Ruby?)
>> * XSL Tools (for xsl dev/debugging)
>> * JSDT (for javascript dev/debugging)
>>
>> ... or just stick w/ PDT SDK + WTP runtime + DLTK runtime, in order to
>> keep the package relatively small?
>>
>
>Including the parts of Subversive that do not have IP issues could be
>considered perhaps? After all, it's an Eclipse project. Instructions to
>retrieve the SVN connectors from the Polarion website could be included
>in the package.
>
>I think it is better to wait for other suggestions from people in this
>newsgroup in order to make a list of possibilities.
>When looking at for instance the J2EE package, I see that there are
>quite a few other features included, such as XML tools, RSE and PDE. I
>think it is safe to include some other features. After all, it should be
>an entry level package that does not require installing more features
>for most of the users. The all-in-one package that we know today could
>then take the role of absolute-minimum package.
>
>I can't wait until the day that http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/
>contains a link with the text "Eclipse IDE for PHP Developers"
>
>--
>Jorrit
--
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86426 is a reply to message #86370] |
Thu, 11 December 2008 17:30 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: dcarver.starstandard.org
If you bring in XSL Tools, unfortunately you'll need to bring in JDT as
well. We have an open bug on this, but it depends on JDT seperating
some things out to a java.runtime.core and java.runtime.ui.
Plus we extend some JDT classes for debugging.
We really should look at migrating to DLTK at some point for debugging
support, but it's a low priority on our end.
Dave
Nick Boldt wrote:
>> An PDT EPP would be great! It should then be decided what other features
>> might be useful to include in this release. My personal vote goes to
>> Mylyn and Subversive. Perhaps add some web development things as well,
>> they might be useful to others.
>> Are there statistics about what other features are commonly used by
>> people that also use PDT?
>
> +1 for Mylyn
>
> -1 for Subversive due to license issues. I believe you can't actually
> get complete support for SVN without updating from a non-Eclipse site
> (Polarion or Tigris), with non-EPL'd code.
>
> If you'd like to put up a poll somewhere (surveymonkey, etc.) I think
> this question deserves some community feedback. For example, should the
> PHP Dev package include:
>
> * Mylyn
> * DLTK stuff other than the core framework (eg., Ruby?)
> * XSL Tools (for xsl dev/debugging)
> * JSDT (for javascript dev/debugging)
>
> ... or just stick w/ PDT SDK + WTP runtime + DLTK runtime, in order to
> keep the package relatively small?
>
|
|
| |
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86470 is a reply to message #86440] |
Fri, 12 December 2008 04:59 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nickboldt+eclipse+newsgroup.gmail.com
> +1 Mylyn, +1 Subversive, +1 Zend Debuger, +1 JSDT, +1 JSDT +1 XSL
Subversive is not an Eclipse.org project; nor is the Zend debugger. To
do a bundle w/ all these in it, you'd have to host this project at
sourceforge or some other not-just-EPL-friendly site. Great idea, but it
won't fly at Eclipse, as part of Galileo or otherwise.
That said... once we get an EPL-friendly bundle at Eclipse, we can more
easily create a non-EPL bundle elsewhere. Consider CDT bundle [1] vs.
Wascana [2] for the C/C++ community. Same idea.
[1] http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/packages/eclipse-ide-cc-dev elopers/ganymedesr1
[2]http://wascana.sourceforge.net/
In related news, I've been playing with adding an Associated Site [3] to
the PDT update site so that when you add it to your Eclipse 3.4, you
will automagically get the DTLK 1.0 update site too.
[3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257773
Nick
--
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86525 is a reply to message #86470] |
Fri, 12 December 2008 15:05 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: dcarver.starstandard.org
Nick Boldt wrote:
>> +1 Mylyn, +1 Subversive, +1 Zend Debuger, +1 JSDT, +1 JSDT +1 XSL
>
> Subversive is not an Eclipse.org project; nor is the Zend debugger. To
> do a bundle w/ all these in it, you'd have to host this project at
> sourceforge or some other not-just-EPL-friendly site. Great idea, but it
> won't fly at Eclipse, as part of Galileo or otherwise.
Actually, Subversive is an eclipse incubating project:
http://www.eclipse.org/subversive/
Subclipse isn't an eclipse project.
The issue is that it depends on non-EPL items to work. Like SVNKit or
JavaHL which have to be installed through seperate update sites, and not
from eclipse.org.
>
> In related news, I've been playing with adding an Associated Site [3] to
> the PDT update site so that when you add it to your Eclipse 3.4, you
> will automagically get the DTLK 1.0 update site too.
>
> [3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257773
Depending on Eclipse guidelines, you MIGHT be able to do the same thing
with the subversive client.
|
|
|
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #86569 is a reply to message #86525] |
Fri, 12 December 2008 16:54 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nickboldt+eclipse+newsgroup.gmail.com
Yeah, I get the two SVN providers mixed up. Apologies. In any case, due
to licensing, there can be no such thing as an all-in-one EPP w/
fully-functional SVN support... hosted at Eclipse.org. (Elsewhere, sure.)
David Carver wrote:
> Nick Boldt wrote:
>>> +1 Mylyn, +1 Subversive, +1 Zend Debuger, +1 JSDT, +1 JSDT +1 XSL
>>
>> Subversive is not an Eclipse.org project; nor is the Zend debugger. To
>> do a bundle w/ all these in it, you'd have to host this project at
>> sourceforge or some other not-just-EPL-friendly site. Great idea, but
>> it won't fly at Eclipse, as part of Galileo or otherwise.
>
> Actually, Subversive is an eclipse incubating project:
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/subversive/
>
> Subclipse isn't an eclipse project.
>
> The issue is that it depends on non-EPL items to work. Like SVNKit or
> JavaHL which have to be installed through seperate update sites, and not
> from eclipse.org.
>
>>
>> In related news, I've been playing with adding an Associated Site [3]
>> to the PDT update site so that when you add it to your Eclipse 3.4,
>> you will automagically get the DTLK 1.0 update site too.
>>
>> [3] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=257773
>
> Depending on Eclipse guidelines, you MIGHT be able to do the same thing
> with the subversive client.
>
>
--
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb
|
|
| | | | |
| Re: Eclipse PDT EPP Bundle (was Re: What has happened to the size of the All-In-One?) [message #87355 is a reply to message #87340] |
Sat, 20 December 2008 08:35 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nickboldt+eclipse+newsgroup.gmail.com
People complained when the all-in-ones included SDKs, because docs and
sources are optional and not explicitly required to use PDT. We now have
a minimal PDT SDK + required runtimes in a single 100M bundle.
As these others (RSE, Mylyn, XSL Tools, whatever) are optional
requirements, my advice is to grab the current 100M all-in-one, then hit
the Ganymede update site to grab whatever extras you want. You can then
cache those requirements in a linked folder so that subsequent
pdt-all-in-ones can reuse them without having to re-download them.
Here's how to use .link files on features you've installed via the p2
Install Manager:
http://divby0.blogspot.com/2008/11/howto-use-p2-update-ui-to -control-where.html
After PDT 2.0 is released and 2.1 has started as part of Galileo, we can
revisit the question of what should be in the EPP PHP Developer package.
Michael Spector wrote:
> This should not be a problem if we integrate the DLTK Mylyn and RSE packages
> as well.
>
> "sNop" <snop3@seznam.cz> wrote in message
> news:gig66h$ga0$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Hi Nick Boldt napsal(a):
>>
>> will be mylyn and RSE part of the all in one ? and if yes so when(at what
>> time) ?
>
>
--
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 18 12:01:09 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03209 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
