Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ide-dev] A new survey


Comments below.

On 03/11/2015 4:17 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
Agreed. And that is my point. This is the non-magical approach.
Perhaps you could stop referring to technology as magic. It seems somehow insulting. Is that the intent?
Do it the
right way in the platform, not requiring a additional plug-in to be
installed to fix the platform¹s problems.
As I explained, it's not just fixing a problem, it's solving a broader problem. E.g., sharing preferences across machines. Also, if I have Java formatter preferences, do I really for sure want all my workspaces and all my installations to have the same ones? And even if I want that, is it true for all users everywhere or is that just what I personally want? I.e., is it always 100% clear cut which preferences should always be the same everywhere and which ones should be specific to each workspace or to all workspaces used by a given installation? If the user controls/decides this, then we won't be having 1000 per-preference debates...

Unfortunately we are where we are. I don¹t have Oomph installed in my IDE
so I don¹t get the benefits of it¹s magic.
Do you don't have the CDT package or any of the packages installed?
When I did, it was shocked by
the UX.
Probably shock is an overstatement, but I was kind of shocked by the giant toolbar buttons of CDT. There's just no pleasing everyone though is there?
Presenting the internal IDs of preferences to the user who doesn¹t
have much hope of understanding what they mean is not what I was hoping to
introduce to new users.
Eventually, with enough metadata, we could build up a nice database of mappings and present pretty descriptions and lovely icons, but I doubt that would eliminate your reservations...
The correct way is to just do the right thing and
not bother the user with it unless they really want to.
It's hard not to look at this cynically, but waiting for a solution that suits you to just show up seems unrealistic. It's not as if all the preferences will be reworked by all the projects anytime soon. It's not even as if the scope of each preference is so entirely cut-in-stone either. Sometimes one needs to be pragmatic and realistic and, if a solution isn't perfect, to suggest improvements instead of flushing the baby away with the bathwater.


On 2015-11-03, 3:05 AM, "ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Gunnar
Wagenknecht" <ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of
gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


This has been discussed since 2004.

I certainly would be interested in such a scope. Back in the days I
thought of a "system" scope (like /etc/eclipse). But ~/.eclipse would be
a great start. Having such a scope in Equinox would help for some RCP use

Yes, adoption within the IDE is a separate topic. That's probably the
reason why the discussion is not progressing. It's too much work to
rework all the existing preferences. Oomph is a different approach but
solves the problem in the IDE for me now.


Gunnar Wagenknecht

Am 03.11.2015 um 06:55 schrieb Marcel Bruch

FWIW: I had that need to store some information in a user-scope like
ids, keys, etc. I¹ve reused the existing implementation to simulate that
user scope in $USER_HOME/.eclipse/. which suffices for my use case. If
there is no reasonable interest in offering such a scope in the
platform, that¹s fine.
ide-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>from this list, visit
ide-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top