Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [] Eclipse 4.0 (was EclipseProjectAnnouncement and Project Review Schedule)

Thanks McQ, it's great to hear the inside story and I appreciate your
honesty. And we would love to hear more from you.

I understand your frustration about the lack of committer community on
the SDK. We certainly have the same frustrations on all Eclipse
projects. I've found the best way to recruite contributors is to talk
openly about what people are working on, and more importantly what
people aren't working on, and the issues of the day. If people are
interested in the same issues or working on the same thing, and they
have the time available, they'll join up.

I think your post, and talking to Jeff McAffer, he's going to post
something too, will go a long way in the right direction. It's easier to
help if we feel welcome and involved from the beginning.

Doug S (not Doug G - but we're getting harder to tell apart, especially
if Doug G gains 150 lbs and I get a pony-tail)

-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf
Of Mike Wilson
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 12:36 PM
Subject: RE: [] Eclipse 4.0 (was
EclipseProjectAnnouncement and Project Review Schedule)

      I *know* that we're all trying to do the right thing here. Really.
I also know that we *all* believe that the level of communication and
community participation that we are striving for in this is orders of
magnitude more than what you have seen from the platform team in the

      So, like everyone who is learning a new way to work, what we
absolutely need from the community is positive re-inforcement when we
get things right, and *gentle* <g> chastisement when we mess up. Your
message below is perfect, in fact, since it simply points out that the
way e4 has been talked about so far has confused things more than it has
helped. I'll make another attempt at clearing that up in a sec (and I'm
sure you'll tell me if I fail), but I want to make one other point

      I care deeply about Eclipse. I have been fighting for its success
since day zero. When I look at today, I am truly humbled by
the sheer magnitude of the successes we (all) have built, and I really
do GET IT that it is the community that has generated that success. So
I'm going to be completely open here: I am _royally_pissed_ that
something so critical to all our successes (i.e. the Eclipse SDK) is
being built by a very small team, most of whom come from one company.
There are exactly two things that I believe are threatening the
continued success of Eclipse right now:

      - lack of a diverse, growing committer community on the SDK

      - a codebase that is so constrained by history that it can't
respond to a rapidly changing computing environment

Addressing those two things is *exactly* why the e4 effort was started.
No hidden agendas. No extra direction from IBM to solve some new
business problem. Nothing else. So what it all comes down to is this: If
someone sees us doing something that doesn't look like it matches one of
those goals, absolutely speak up! But, for God's sake, give us the
benefit of a doubt. We will make mistakes, but they will be honest ones.
For my part, I personally commit to making e4 be the kind of community
driven project we all want.

      Anyway, I've ranted enough -- let me get back to your post...

      The only code that exists that is related to e4, is a couple of
cool(ish) demos (neither of which is called "e4") that we built to help
us figure out whether some ideas we had about new directions were
valuable or not -- As Steve says, "We think with our fingers". I'd been
planning to show that code at EclipseCON, because I also believe that
demos speak louder than powerpoint, but we really only had them in
publishable shape in the last couple of weeks. In retrospect, what we
should have done was just dump them in some existing place in CVS and be
done with it, but we thought that making them more visible was
important. The idea was that by building a separate component for them,
they would both be easy to find and, when we did get the e4 effort
rolling, they would be easy to move to another home (assuming that made

      Obviously, we misjudged the implications of the proposal that went
out. If I had know that it was going to have the impact that it did I
would have spent more time wordsmithing it when Steve showed it to me. I
apologize for the confusion that it caused. [Heck, when I went back and
re-read it, *I* thought it was bogus.]

      I do believe that there will need to be a *new* shared area to
work, once e4 actually starts to happen. My current theory is that the
best place for that would be as a new incubator project unto itself,
under the Eclipse Project, with the initial committer list being
*everyone* who wants to get involved. I've started putting together a
proposal for the creation of such a project, but in any case, that's not
going to happen until after EclipseCON and I'm happy to discuss other



             "Schaefer, Doug"


             Sent by:



             03/06/08 21:12
                                       Eclipse 4.0 (was Eclipse

                                       ProjectAnnouncement and Project

             Please respond to         Review Schedule)








Thanks, Jochen. Communication about this is critical. Unfortunately you
even started this e-mail by calling "e4" the next version of the Eclipse
platform and I'm still stuck that "e4" is the prototype you are
proposing. I'm sure we all have different visions of what the next major
version of Eclipse needs to be and I look forward to participating in
the process that ensures as many of those needs are met as possible.

Doug S.

-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf
Of Jochen Krause
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:19 PM
To:;; Mike Wilson;
Steve Northover
Subject: [] Eclipse 4.0 (was Eclipse
ProjectAnnouncement and Project Review Schedule)

Dear Board and Architecture Council members,

I would like to clarify the situation around "e4", the next version of
the Eclipse platform, as there is a discussion going on about an "e4"
incubator project component.

There has been a presentation to the Eclipse board about moving the
Eclipse platform to a new level for Eclipse 4.0 in December 2007.
Defining the scope of Eclipse 4.0 has also been one of the Eclipse 3.4
plan item.

The platform team has recently requested to create a new component
within the Eclipse incubator project to make their technology
evaluations available to the community. This has been perceived as a
"decision" about the next version of the platform by some readers - and
the wording of the component proposal can easily be interpreted this
way. But this is not at all the intention of this component. The
component is just about sharing code.

The Eclipse platform and the RAP team have met to see if they could work
together on e4. We saw our meeting as a part of the "pre-proposal-phase"
of a new project. We have planned to join forces and will announce
shortly a proposal for an e4 incubator project, following the Eclipse
guidelines and process. The process has been established to make
projects transparent and help to engage with the community.

And we are serious about it: Everybody is welcome to join, collaborate,
comment or critizise! There is a lot of work to do. We think that we
need to innovate in many areas to retain a leadership position for
Eclipse, and your know how is welcome. EclipseCon will be a great
opportunity to meet and discuss.

It is really good news that some of the processes that many of us
perceive as a burden most of the time have a value. Receiving comments
and concerns about something that is only planned shows that our
processes apply to reality and that the Eclipse community is very vital.


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf
Of Schaefer, Doug
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:40 PM
Subject: [] RE: Eclipse
ProjectAnnouncementandProject Review Schedule

You're right, the planning council list may not be the best place,
certainly all the councils and the board itself need to be interested in
this. For the Arch council members, please check full e-mail thread on
the archives page started by Doug Gaff:

Getting back to the "Component" description: "The result was the design
of a new platform "e4", which will be the basis for Eclipse 4.0." By new
platform, did you mean fork? My fear is that this is a likely scenario,
which would make the issues Doug Gaff brought up originally even more
important. If we're going to have two platforms, we'd better have the
processes in place to ensure they get the resourcing necessary to keep
them both alive.

Doug Schaefer.

-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of
Boris Bokowski
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:11 PM
Subject: []
RE:[] Eclipse Project
AnnouncementandProject Review Schedule

Whoa.  I expected a flamewar on planeteclipse, but not here.

Doug Gaff wrote:
> What is frustrating me about this project proposal

You misread the announcement e-mail.  It is not a project proposal,
merely a new *component* in the existing Eclipse Incubator project.  I
admit that one can easily be confused with the other.

We realized (admittedly, very late) that nobody from the SWT team had
commit rights in the existing Eclipse Incubator project. Creating a new
component in that Incubator project was the fastest way to create a home
for experimental code that we will be demoing at EclipseCon, with write
access to everybody who has been involved so far - people at IBM,
Innoopract, and Code 9.

The key words are "so far" - our hope is to find more people and
companies who would like to work with us on e4.

Could we continue this discussion in a more open forum? The Planning
Council mailing list is not open to everybody; I had to ask nicely to be
added as a subscriber. For example, could a new mailing list be created,
e.g. eclipse-incubator-e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx? (I believe we asked for this
as part of the component creation process already.)


Boris Bokowski
Eclipse Platform UI committer
IBM Rational Software, Ottawa Lab

_______________________________________________ mailing list
_______________________________________________ mailing list
_______________________________________________ mailing list

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to
the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you
must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
_______________________________________________ mailing list

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to
the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you
must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.

_______________________________________________ mailing list

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to
the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you
must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.

Back to the top