Flux is itself concerned with the messaging architecture. The IDE demonstrations are an example.
I've been putting together a short email to Martin Lippert to ask about the status of Flux since EclipseCon, but haven't sent it yet. I really like its model.
Jay
On Mar 16, 2016 4:16 AM, "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
+1 for cloud workspace / desktop IDE for convergence.
Wasn’t the Flux project exactly about that ?
https://www.eclipse.org/flux/
I see many committers but no recent commits, does anybody know
recent status ?
https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/technology.flux/who
https://github.com/eclipse/flux/graphs/contributors
Thanks,
Martin
--
*Martin Oberhuber*, SMTS / Product Owner – Development Tools,
*Wind River*
direct +43.662.457915.85 fax +43.662.457915.6
*From:*eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>] *On
Behalf Of *Jay Jay Billings
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 16, 2016 3:54 AM
*To:* eclipse.org-architecture-council
*Subject:* Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting?
What I don't understand is why we can't market both? They cover
different spaces and we can delineate them. Che is for
institutional cloud-based installs and Eclipse is for the single
workstation. This is the difference between Che being "the" next
generation Eclipse IDE and it being "a" next generation Eclipse IDE.
I think I would personally be happy if the Che guys just left some
marketing room for Eclipse and stopped making it sound like
everyone was jumping ship.
One cool thing we could do would be to make a YouTube video
showing someone doing a project in Che and then connecting to it
with Eclipse and SSH. Tyler didn't go into detail about how to do
that, but he mentioned it a lot. Then we could be talking more
about convergence.
Jay
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Jay Jay Billings
<jayjaybillings@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:jayjaybillings@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I'm going to change the subject on this thread and wax
philosophically about technical ideas related to the IDE because I
don't want to interfere with this discussion.
Jay
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik
<konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
The other angle to consider is how this plays out at management
level. It’s very difficult to argue that you need more resources
to work on Eclipse IDE when the management sees Eclipse Foundation
at least tacitly endorsing something else as a path forward.
I don’t recall similarly problematic messaging when Orion was
getting started.
Thanks,
- Konstantin
*From: *Doug Schaefer <mailto:cdtdoug@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent: *Tuesday, March 15, 2016 10:01 AM
*To: *eclipse.org-architecture-council
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject: *Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
We refocused. EclipseCon 2016 had more tracks than previous
years and the programme committee certainly pumped up the
desktop IDE content. This is a trend that I believe we'll
continue.
I'll admit that there are subtleties in marketing that I don't
understand. Harmful is in the eye of the beholder.
I believe it was Ed who pointed out that there are people in the
community, on the newcomers list, who were confused about the
messaging, about whether they should be abandoning the Eclipse IDE
for Che. I think we concluded at the meeting that that was harmful.
Wayne
On 15/03/16 12:47 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
> Clearly, we have a perception problem.
Indeed
> I'm not convinced that the data supports your position:
there was plenty
> of content at EclipseCon focused on the desktop IDE and
related projects.
> Including two of my talks and at least one of the keynotes.
It’s not my position. I am conveying what I heard from the
marketing department when I asked why Oracle wasn’t
sponsoring this year’s EclipseCon. At dev level, I can
tell you that many here have given up on submitting talk
proposals because talks focused on traditional desktop IDE
areas have not been getting accepted in the last few years.
> The "next generation" messaging is not coming from the
Eclipse Foundation,
> it's coming from the Che project. I understand that this
distinction may be lost
> on the greater community.
Are you saying that Eclipse Foundation is not able to
exert influence over a member project to stop this harmful
messaging?
Thanks,
- Konstantin
*From: *Wayne Beaton <mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Sent: *Tuesday, March 15, 2016 9:35 AM
*To: *Konstantin Komissarchik
<mailto:konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>;
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject: *Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next
Meeting?
All of our efforts around FEEP are concerned with putting
energy into the desktop IDE. Moving Mikael into the
development position is also concerned exclusively with
the desktop IDE. The Eclipse Foundation has never employed
developers before. Our first development effort contracts
and hire are exclusively concerned with addressing long
standing issues with the desktop IDE. Clearly, we have a
perception problem.
I'm not convinced that the data supports your position:
there was plenty of content at EclipseCon focused on the
desktop IDE and related projects. Including two of my
talks and at least one of the keynotes.
The "next generation" messaging is not coming from the
Eclipse Foundation, it's coming from the Che project. I
understand that this distinction may be lost on the
greater community.
Again, we have an opportunity with the press attention on
Che to steal some of that attention for the desktop IDE.
What are we going to do about it?
Wayne
On 15/03/16 12:24 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
I see Che’s messaging as a serious issue. To a lay
person, the fact that this message is coming from an
Eclipse Foundation project lends it authority. Many
wouldn’t understand that this is just another project
trying something new rather than the official path
forward endorsed by the community bringing them the
current Eclipse IDE.
More broadly, it seems to me that Eclipse Foundation
is focusing primarily on new initiatives outside of
desktop IDE space these days. Oracle’s marketing
department did not sponsor this past EclipseCon
because the content has been less and less relevant to
desktop IDE space, which is our main reason for
involvement.
Thanks,
- Konstantin
*From: *Wayne Beaton <mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Sent: *Tuesday, March 15, 2016 8:32 AM
*To: *eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*Subject: *Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next
Meeting?
Che is giving us some visibility. How do we leverage
this? How do we encourage people who are looking at
Che to maybe give the desktop IDE a fresh look?
Wayne
On 15/03/16 05:12 AM, Eike Stepper wrote:
Am 14.03.2016 um 21:03 schrieb Doug Schaefer:
Oh, and our discussion on Che and the impact
calling it the "Next Generation Eclipse IDE"
has on the existing IDE and community was
really good too :).
So can we do something to make the situation
better for us?
I googled
https://www.google.de/search?q=%22Next+Generation+Eclipse+IDE%22&oq=%22Next+Generation+Eclipse+IDE%22&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
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 <mailto:emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
to request removal.
-- Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
-- Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
-- Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation
EclipseCon NA 2016 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
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@eclipse.orgto request
removal. <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
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
<mailto:emo@xxxxxxxxxxx> to request removal.
--
Jay Jay Billings
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
--
Jay Jay Billings
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
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
<mailto:emo@xxxxxxxxxxx> to request removal.
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
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.
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.
