[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] A suggested topic for PlanningCouncil Discussion
- From: Dave Steinberg <davidms@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 19:06:00 -0400
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
To me, the hard problem is *how* do you create a unified whole out of a
mish-mash of projects? It's certainly easier to do with fewer projects
than the number currently planning to go into Ganymede. But are we
honestly going to be able to come up with a good set of criteria for
inclusion, much less a way to fairly apply that criteria? And can we
possibly achieve that without creating major ill will?
If we wanted to follow the example of Linux distributions, they definitely
don't do it that way. A distribution is produced by a whole other set of
people that define their criteria and do the packaging, integration
testing, upstream bug reporting and even, where necessary, fix problems
locally. They get to make the decisions because they do the legwork. And,
of course, it behooves the projects to help them out because they're the
channel to the users.
I would think that the parallel would be to use the output of Ganymede as
input into an integration/packaging effort. Are there any interests in the
Eclipse community who would step up and do this kind of work?
Rational Software - IBM Toronto Lab
Nick Boldt wrote on 11/02/2007 11:31:07 PM:
> So, then, you're for the idea of merit-based tiers? Something akin
> to package repos like main, restricted, universe, multiverse,
> testing, stable, etc.
> Seems entirely reasonable, IMHO, especially if we don't call them
> "Hi Fi" and "Simultaneous" , but rather "main" and "multiverse".
>  http://wiki.eclipse.org/Ganymede#Two_Classes_of_Participation
> Nick _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-planning-council mailing list