Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Preferences (topic was touched in "Eclipse smells kind of dead" thread)

> I'm not sure why we're always expecting companies to drop bus loads of
> developers into projects when we have a pretty healthy individual contributor
> community already at Eclipse. In fact, over half of CDT contributions of late are
> coming from individuals, not companies. And it's really coming from users who
> have the skills to contribute back and not only make their lives better, but others
> as well, and get rewarded by seeing their work on the big stage.

That is really good news for CDT. I wish we had a lot more projects that were in your position. But the flip side is that the platform is not in that position today. Others will have to speak to what it will take to get to a position as enviable as CDT's. 

In addition, the key resources that we have supporting the simultaneous release process like David and Markus are, in fact, supported by member companies.  And as far as I know, they are tapped out. I do not think that we can realistically ask them to do more. And if we want them to do something different, I for one would prefer to hear from them what they would like to change. Maybe I'm wrong, and they would be perfectly happy to push out two release trains a year (for example).

> So really, the changes I'm talking about, more frequent release cycles, creating a
> list of features and bugs we'd like fixed, is aimed at attracting more individuals to
> the party. And I'm pretty sure there are some companies who would like to see
> the same. Create the buzz and companies may take another look.

We are certainly agreed about the need to attract more contributors of all types. The Eclipse Foundation has also been pushing this agenda for the last couple of years. Embracing git, implementing CBI, project hosting at GitHub, and switching to CLAs are all examples of things that we did specifically to help reduce barriers to contribution. 

I agree that we need to increase the pace of innovation. My point is that I don't see a realistic discussion on this thread about resourcing the changes that we would all like to see. I would love to be wrong.

Back to the top