|Re: [ide-dev] [epp-dev] Package maintainers: I need you to weigh in on this discussion.|
I guess I was just trying to be polite. I don’t get why I’d want this one. So I’d vote –1 on it unless someone can make a better case for it. Adding in features takes time. We need to make sure we don’t cause more UI clutter and performance problems with it, etc. I’d rather start with something that has obvious value.
From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Eclipse Packaging Project <epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, November 25, 2013 at 2:30 PM
To: "epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Eclipse Packaging Project <epp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [epp-dev] Package maintainers: I need you to weigh in on this discussion.
There is no "IDE working group". Although I do hope that someone will step up to drive the process of writing a charter and getting it created.
Regarding why Workspace Mechanic is the first, I'm not sure if I understand the question. Something has to be the first one we try. It seems to me that no matter which one we pick to be the guinea pig, we will learn a lot about what's possible.
Rather than the current ad-hoc approach, maybe the IDE working group could come up with a prioritized list of potential features to add to the packages? We could solicit suggestions and create a list that could include such things as who is going to maintain the feature, the impact it's likely to have on the packages, and who is going to test the feature for each package. Based on this, the list could identify in which release the feature will be included. Perhaps features could be sponsored by companies willing to fund their maintenance in return for a modest amount of advertising (something on the welcome page and a logo, for example)?
On Nov 25, 2013, at 9:08 AM, "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Back to the top