[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java Code Geeks

On that topic, I noticed this over the weekend. Sounds like the Drupal project has a similar idea, crowdfunding work on core features. Interesting to watch.

https://www.drupalfund.us/

Doug.

From: John Arthorne <John_Arthorne@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, 23 September, 2013 11:14 AM
To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java Code Geeks

> From: Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx>
> I fully agree with that. To put it even more strong if Eclipse
> Foundation offers support directly that will be direct conflict with
> some of its members that do the same in one way or another. If what
> is wanted is Foundation to become a company that competes directly
> with its current members offering support then Foundation should be
> ready to hire way more developers than anticipated now to cover the
> lost developers that work on foundation hosted projects now.

I don't think anyone wants the foundation competing directly with its members. On the other hand if the Eclipse Foundation hypothetically had a developer working on JDT, I think it could be done in a way that would not be a competitive threat for members. I.e., it wouldn't be in the form of support contracts or paying for particular feature work, but by donations that the Foundation would then allocate independently to strengthen the core IDE platform. There is no mechanism available today to make a donation that goes directly toward development of the Eclipse platform, and it may be an untapped source of getting contributions to the platform that would benefit all members. There are other possible approaches like having the Foundation act as a clearinghouse, or operate a grant program, or somehow enable financial contributions to flow through to *someone* actually making concrete code contributions to the platform. I think it's at least worth thinking about these ideas, because the current models for getting contributions to the platform are not being successful.

John