Hi Eric [Eric Williams],
Could you please create an issue for each of these points in
https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt so that we can take this discussion forward in the github against the respective issues?
Thanks,
Manoj
From:
jdt-dev <jdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Manoj Palat <manoj.palat@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, 17 November 2022 at 5:09 PM
To: Eclipse JDT general developers list. <jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jdt-dev] Red Hat's Future Java Tooling Plans and JDT
Hi, In general, I agree to Eric William’s suggestion of the separation/layering and making JDT independent layers so that it appeals to a wider audience. Agree
completely with Aleks that a virbrant community is essential to keep up with the
|
This Message Is From an External Sender
|
|
This message came from outside your organization.
|
|
|
Hi,
In general, I agree to Eric William’s suggestion of the separation/layering and making JDT independent layers so that it appeals to a wider audience. Agree completely with Aleks that a virbrant community
is essential to keep up with the Java changes. And also with Andrey that we don’t want a fork which would render a dead part of EclipseIDE.
However, since there are multiple technical points raised in the original mail, would suggest discussions on each of these technical separately/logically-grouped to work out the nuances. Am positive
that we can come up with agreeable solutions for these tech issues once we dig deeper into each of these.
A +1 from my side for this initiative – my 2 cents…
Regards,
Manoj
=
From:
jdt-dev <jdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, 15 November 2022 at 12:55 PM
To: jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jdt-dev] Red Hat's Future Java Tooling Plans and JDT
Thanks. That does sound promising and much needed. . . On 15. 11. 2022 08: 13, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 9: 03 AM Ed Merks <ed. merks@ gmail. com>
wrote: I wonder what is the expected impact on the very large community
|
This Message Is From an External Sender
|
|
This message came from outside your organization.
|
|
|
Thanks. That does sound promising and much needed...
On 15.11.2022 08:13, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
I wonder what is the expected impact on the very large community
downstream of JDT? Just in SimRel I see ~250 bundles downstream from
jdt.core and that's just a small sample size...
Positive. Having a vibrant community that is able to keep up with new Java versions and make JDT better suited for more use cases while following the current deprecation policy or adjust that and have a decent notification period for other
cases.
After all, the same style changes in Platform is what allowed us to still release something downstreams can build on top of.
It's definitely not the "eternal compatibility" policy downstreams were used to but the alternative is not better IMHO.
On 15.11.2022 06:44, Christoph Läubrich wrote:
> > For Red Hat it's important to understand whether the community agrees
> > with us on the overall direction and is ready to accept that a good
> > number of things have to change
>
> I agree (if it counts for anything) on the overall direction :-)
>
> Am 14.11.22 um 20:50 schrieb Aleksandar Kurtakov:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 8:27 PM Christoph Läubrich
>> <laeubi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:laeubi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> disclaimer: I'm not a jdt committer (just user, some times
>> contributor)
>> but can understand some of your pain points as I was already hit by
>> them
>> (e.g. release process) so really would like some improvements in
>> that
>> area as well!
>>
>> Just some thoughts here:
>>
>> 1) jdt.core recently enabled github discussions:
>> https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/discussions
>> <https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/discussions>
>>
>> it might be good to split your mentioned items into separate
>> discussions
>> instead of one big "all we need to solve" as its easier to follow
>> more
>> focused discussion than one big mailing-list thread.
>>
>>
>> For Red Hat it's important to understand whether the community agrees
>> with us on the overall direction and is ready to accept that a good
>> number of things have to change, not whether change A, B.. X, Y, Z
>> are fine. Thus single discussion is better suited here compared to
>> going into technical details about possible change X.
>>
>>
>> 2) If "The Eclipse team at Red Hat" has contributed in the past to
>> JDT I
>> think its fair to ask for a committer election for some of them
>> so they
>> get more influence/visibility on the JDT project.
>>
>>
>> 3) If its just a matter of "how can we build / release more
>> independently" I can offer the JDT-Team to help out at these parts
>>
>> 4) There are already some effort going on to restructure JDT
>> (e.g. the
>> compiler see
>> https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/pull/182
>> <https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/pull/182>
)
>> but it could need some help from people more familiar with JDT (than
>> me)
>> to push such initiatives forward, so probably your team can help
>> with
>> that as well? I think PR backlog is actually something where help is
>> needed.
>>
>> 5) For "users feel lost" I think the best is to just suggest
>> where/what
>> documentation needs improvements, its often hard to guess *what*
>> holds
>> users back e.g. the move to github has already lowered the
>> barrier much
>> I think, but for sure there are things to still improve!
>>
>> best
>> Christoph
>>
>> Am 14.11.22 um 18:21 schrieb Eric Williams:
>> > Hello members of the JDT community:
>> >
>> > I am the manager of the Eclipse team at Red Hat -- some of you
>> may know
>> > me from my days working on SWT-GTK. I am writing to you today to
>> give an
>> > update on Red Hat's future plans with respect to Java tooling and
>> JDT.
>> >
>> > The age of language support tooling specifically built for one
>> IDE is
>> > long gone. This has made us, the Eclipse team at Red Hat,
>> adjust our
>> > strategy around Java tooling development over time. Years ago, we
>> became
>> > heavily involved in Eclipse JDT.LS <http://JDT.LS>,
which relies
>> on the Eclipse JDT
>> > project to provide most of the compiler and language
>> functionality
>> > underneath. Our contributions to this piece of the ecosystem have
>> worked
>> > well for years but are no longer sufficient due to considerably
>> reduced
>> > involvement in the JDT project overall.
>> >
>> > A significant cause of the decrease in contributions is the
>> lack of
>> > velocity in JDT development, which forces dependent projects, and
>> > potential contributors to stack workarounds in their own projects
>> > instead of contributing the improvements back to JDT.
>> Contributing
>> > JDT.LS <http://JDT.LS>
specific fixes and improvements upstream
>> to JDT has been part of
>> > our team duties for the last few years. Unfortunately, this is
>> not the
>> > default behavior across the board, which leads us to ask each of
>> you for
>> > some fundamental changes in both JDT and its dependent project’s
>> practices.
>> >
>> >
>> > Here is a list of things that from our POV are hard requirements
>> for the
>> > projects to continue to thrive:
>> >
>> > A) Releng Improvements
>> > - Reorganize the JDT codebase, decouple it from Eclipse specific
>> > concepts (workspaces, resource model, etc.). This is already
>> WIP. [1]
>> >
>> > - Move the jdt.core.manipulation project to the eclipse.jdt.core
>> > repository, enabling a separate releng procedure that allows the
>> release
>> > of JDT core bits on demand, easing its consumption by non-Eclipse
>> > projects to consume it.
>> >
>> > B) Refactorings
>> > - A big percentage of the Java functionality is tightly coupled
>> with the
>> > Eclipse UI which makes it unusable for JDT.LS <http://JDT.LS>
>> (recent thread [2] on the
>> > topic).
>> >
>> > - JDT developers should think of core/UI separation from the very
>> > beginning of the implementation of a new feature, instead of
>> > implementing things coupled to UI, and expect to later refactor
>> to JDT
>> > core.
>> >
>> > C) Project Rules
>> > Many project rules prevent contributions from people not deeply
>> involved
>> > in development of the Eclipse IDE, while the overall project’s
>> focus
>> > should be adjusting rules towards better community engagement.
>> For
>> > example: “mass changes” and refactorings being accepted only
>> for M1
>> > means that integrators have to wait 2 out of every 3 months for
>> the next
>> > opportunity to have changes merged. Furthermore, the development
>> period
>> > of the Eclipse release cycle falls twice per year during vacation
>> > periods (summer and Christmas), when many committers are not
>> around to
>> > review changes.
>> >
>> > D) Code Modernization
>> > In order to attract new contributors, we must make things
>> easier for
>> > newcomers to join. Changes that help newcomers not feel lost
>> in the
>> > codebase, regardless of their immediate technical benefit, must
>> be as
>> > important as changes that technically improve the project.
>> >
>> >
>> > We (the Eclipse team at Red Hat) would like to ask all of you JDT
>> > committers if we can count on you to work together with us on the
>> above
>> > changes to modernize the project for its continued success. We
>> > appreciate your answers and discussions of the above
>> recommendations.
>> > Every piece of this conversation will help us adjust our team’s
>> strategy
>> > around Java IDE tooling. It will also help guide our decisions
>> about
>> > what projects to invest in, which areas will be a pain-point
>> for our
>> > team, and whether better opportunities should be pursued.
>> >
>> >
>> > 1: https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/pull/182
>> <https://github.com/eclipse-jdt/eclipse.jdt.core/pull/182>
>> >
>> > 2: https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jdt-dev/msg02169.html
>> <https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jdt-dev/msg02169.html>
>> >
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> jdt-dev mailing list
>> jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
>> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Aleksandar Kurtakov
>> Red Hat Eclipse Team
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jdt-dev mailing list
>> jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
> _______________________________________________
> jdt-dev mailing list
> jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
_______________________________________________
jdt-dev mailing list
jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
--
_______________________________________________
jdt-dev mailing list
jdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jdt-dev
|
