Re: [eclipse-dev] Eclipse 3.4 shape

[Kevin McGuire <Kevin_McGuire@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>That'd just set a different
expectations, and dilute the meaning of "simultaneous release".

Not sure I agree with that but you may
have a better feel for the pulse of the community.  "Simultaenous
release" for me means all the stuff will work together, that's all.

If EPP can be p2 download enabled that's
clearly optimal.  But in the even they can't, the choice will come
down to an inconsistent approach (p2 dowloader for SDK, zip for EPP), or
no p2 downloader for either.  The latter means we miss the chance
to properly exercise the work in wide usage, which is a shame and contrary
to how we've always approached things. 

Going forward, we may want to consider
the marketting message (which I by no means know anything about) as being
that the SDK download path is for technology adopters and the EPP are the
equivalent of shrink wrap products. 

Kevin

David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

04/18/2008 10:53 AM

Please respond to
"General development mailing list of the Eclipse project."        <eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	"General development mailing list of the Eclipse project." <eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	Re: [eclipse-dev] Eclipse 3.4 shape

I think this may be a "marketing issue" (which I seldom have
opinions about :) 
but, I'd think if EPP doesn't have it, the Platform project should not
"feature it prominently". 
That'd just set a different expectations, and dilute the meaning of "simultaneous
release". 

Of course, if someone wanted to help EPP get that going, and you're really
confident in the technology, 
I'm sure they'd appreciate the contribution.

From:	Kevin McGuire <Kevin_McGuire@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:	"General development mailing list of the Eclipse project." <eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	04/18/2008 10:08 AM
Subject:	Re: [eclipse-dev] Eclipse 3.4 shape

---

First of all, I want to express my enthusiasm that we finally have a proper
installer.  Its just such the right answer, we really should encourage
its use.  Plus, as always, we need to exercise the code in real usage
to work out the bugs and gain confidence.  So +1 for it being prominent
on the download page.  If the current stability is sufficient (is
it?), we should make it the default way of getting your SDK (with the zip
available as a legacy path). 

Clearly though the work is still relatively new, and I'm concerned about
the remaining runway for EPP.  It'd be great to see some EPP exploration
right now, but I suspect we're too late for "production use"
for them for 3.4; I don't believe they have a ton of manpower and they
likely need a few milestones for adoption.  I don't view inconsistency
a major problem: the EPP packages are like products, and often a product
may decide to delay adoption of a new technology for a release.  But
what do you EPP folks think? 

Summary: 
+1 to installer for SDK prominent on download page
-1 recommned for EPP adoption in 3.4 (but its up to the EPP folks)

Kevin 
_______________________________________________
eclipse-dev mailing list
eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-dev