+1 (especially the beer part...;-)....just had to take a try at defending my baby. I'm extremely encourages to see the extent of the interest in moving forward.
Doug Schaefer ---09/15/2016 11:52:35 AM---I’m not sure how helpful this debate is. We have ended up where we are. There’s a new crop of contri
From: Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 09/15/2016 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [ide-dev] e4 debate
Sent by: ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
I’m not sure how helpful this debate is. We have ended up where we are. There’s a new crop of contributors that have been working hard and bringing Eclipse forward. We’re headed in the right direction.I got to know the platform committers in Ottawa very well over the years and was at the e4 Summit that kicked it all off. They had their hearts in the right place and were trying to do what they though was the right thing. But that’s over and we need to look forward.Happy to talk more on the subject, but I and you need a beer in our hands :).Doug.From: <ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Mickael Istria <mistria@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 11:41 AM
To: "ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ide-dev] e4 debate
On 09/15/2016 05:17 PM, Eric Moffatt wrote:
As a relatively new regular contributor to Platform UI, I must say that what made the project more open to me are more the changes about releng (move to Tycho) and contribution infra (Hudson, Gerrit) than the move to e4. On the "higher level" parts of the IDE (Wizard, views, and very user-oriented things more than core, performance and so on), I currently didn't perceive any benefit of e4 and I never have the opportunity to take advantage of its features. My only attempt so far (adding a context-menu to the main toolbar) of adding some extensibility and tweaking some renderer is currently still a failure.
The idea of e4 was to simplify the platform code to the point where we could allow contributors to 'get in the game' and to be *successful*. It's worth noting in this context that in 2015 the Platform UI project was voted the 'Most Open' having garnered many new committers from diverse sources (I'm not sure but I suspect we have more now than ever before).
I do not question whether e4 was necessary or not, I'd just like to share that in my opinion, e4 still fails at provided huge value for developing the Eclipse IDE, has definitely cost a lot of resources that end-users would rather have seen placed elsewhere, and that it's not what has caused the recent boost in the contributions to Platform UI.
s/Apple/Google, but yeah, overall I agree.
As for the reason for the drop off I'd point to the decision of Apple to go with Android Studio as being the turning point, followed by the current unrelenting marketing campaign from JetBrains...
But about JetBrains, it's not about Marketing, it's really about a very good strategy in their product that has allowed them to deliver a good functional quality. They've basically implemented years ago what we're still discussing here (solid factorization of common parts - editors, commands, views...), so they can simply create nice features for new technos faster than we can do now. We're just paying the price of the Tragedy of Commons, and luckily, there are now enough motivated contributors to succeed on this challenge!
Eclipse developer for Red Hat Developers
My blog - My Tweets_______________________________________________
ide-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit