Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stephan Herrmann" <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:40:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2
> On 09/06/2012 08:23 AM, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> > Introducing a new platform undoubtedly consumes a lot of resources.
> > Doing that anyway (and as the only viable alternative), well aware
> > that
> > those resources were scarce and that the new platform had inferior
> > performance, and then blame the community for not helping, that
> > doesn't
> > fly well with me.
> Maybe the problem is, "the community" isn't quite as homogeneous as
> we keep thinking. 3.8 vs. 4.2 is a conflict of interests between
> different groups of people.
> If you are part of the group that only sees regressions not a single
> improvement in 4.2, it's difficult to get motivated helping those
> other guys getting their baby up to speed. Of course those who
> greatly benefit from the new architecture don't want to get slowed
> down by "legacy" decisions.
> Lets call one group the IDE nerds and the other group the e4-RCP
> folks.
> As a thought experiment: are the e4-RCP folks strong enough in
> resources
> to make 4.3 a replacement that will not get into faces of the IDE
> nerds?

What about e4-RCP folks outnumber the IDE nerds significantly (amongst active contributors) so it's there call.
"The one that does the job decides!"

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

> I don't know the answer, but I feel the answer differs depending on
> whether you focus on functionality, bugs, performance or usability.
> Yes, we are still one community, and I'm not advocating fences and
> boundaries, but helping each other seems to work best when cost and
> benefits are equally balanced in all regions of this community.
> On 09/06/2012 07:06 AM, Pascal Rapicault wrote:
>  > But more importantly than all this is the meta conclusion that the
>  > era of being able to take the platform for granted is over and
>  > that
>  > we are all going to have to pay more attention to it, roll up our
>  > sleeves and contribute.
> I'd like to second this. No part of the entire ecosystem can be taken
> for granted, not the platform, not jdt, not p2, nor the team
> providers.
> All components need continued care and everybody needs help
> (no sarcasm intended, in case anyone wonders).
> cheers,
> Stephan
> PS: Great to see efforts to bring performance tests back! Thanks!
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Back to the top