I think that the feedback you have received so far should be taken as a
problem with the writers rather than a problem with the readers. If it
was just one person "misreading" then that would be one thing, but when
many of the senior Eclipse committers are "misreading", then it's
probably a "mis-write" instead of a "mis-read". May I suggest that the
words "The result was the design of a new platform ..." (and
other similar words) tend to indicate the work is *complete* and thus
no longer needing input from others. That may not have been your
intent, but it sure comes across that way.
Boris Bokowski wrote:
And another item -- you said:
You misread the announcement e-mail.
So this begs two questions:
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
(1) Where was this code written, if it wasn't written *in public* in
the Incubator? If it wasn't written in public then (1a) it needs to go
through IP Review before being committed to the repository (sorry,
that's the rule) and (1b) how can you claim that it's a public and open
process if the code is not being written in public?
(2) If the Planning Council people are surprised by this announcement
then you've been doing a poor job of building community, eh? I'd say
that people like Doug and Doug are some of the more
connected-to-what's-going-on people in Eclipse-land right now, so the
fact that they are surprised by this announcement bodes poorly for open
and public nature of this exploration to date.
-- New Page 1
[end of message]