Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [tools-pmc] IDE

On 13-07-21 5:23 PM, "Mike Milinkovich" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>

>> But you are certainly right, and I'm not sure a "PMC" is the right thing
>either for 
>> the reasons you mention. It would certainly be abnormal. But I also
>> it's a working group which appears to be more of an industry consortium
>> I may be wrong.
>> Basically what I'm looking for is a group to oversee the Eclipse IDE
>packages and
>> help influence and guide contributors, much as commercial IDE teams do,
>> except without the reporting structure. Maybe more like Valve manages,
>> manages, it's teams.
>> The best outcome is that this group becomes the first point of contact,
>> who are users of the Eclipse IDE who want to contribute but don't really
>> about Eclipse's project structure, they just want a good IDE. We could
>> them, help make sure they're heard and accepted, stuff like that.
>> And, no it's not a slam against the Eclipse PMC. I fully hope that they
>> participate in this group as well, especially since I'm hoping they're a
>> beneficiary. Most of the issues reported by IDE users will require
>to the
>> Platform. But this grows beyond that, to consistency between language
>> as an example, or managing toolbar and menu clutter when you have
>> projects installed.
>> Sounds like I'm brainstorming here, and I certainly am. But having such
>> would give a home to like minded individuals to work towards common
>> bigger than the projects today. Maybe it's not the Tools PMC, but
>certainly we'd
>> be a big part of it given the projects we represent.
>I have thought about this several times since Doug posted it. I do agree
>with the top level assertion that we need to breath more energy into our
>efforts. I think that is pretty clear. But the Eclipse community has a
>limited set of organizational structures: working groups, PMCs, projects,
>and the Councils. So if such a group was to come into being, how would it
>organized? It seems like what Doug envisages is a cross-cutting concern
>bridges existing projects and PMCs, and perhaps even the Planning Council.
>My suggestion at the moment is that a working group would be the best way
>go. Working groups can be made up of any group of members (and committers
>are members!) who want to work together on something. We talk a lot about
>the bigger, organizationally-focused ones at the moment, but in the past
>we've had any number of working groups assembled around various topics.

As I commented on,
the best starting point would be a landing web page for the IDE as well as
a mailing list. One suggestion for now is to have those owned by the Tools
PMC until we figure out what organization we need.

And that may very well be a working group the more I think about it,
especially given the way you describe it. As long as the general public
can subscribe to the mailing list since that's where we want to find new

>But regardless of the organizational structure, defining the goals, scope
>and participation of such a group will be a significant effort. As will
>getting the buy-in and active support of the various stakeholders in the
>existing projects. That seems to me to be the hard part.

Of course. That's the eternal truth with open source.

But I want to turn this on it's ear. Start with conversation, build up
energy around a common theme, the Eclipse IDE, and from there facilitate
contribution. I have no idea if it'll work, but I've been thrilled with
the discussion on cross-projects. If we turn just some of that energy into
contribution, we'll move the yardsticks.

>P.S. I have no idea what "Valve" is.

Valve Software. The company with no managers that does crazy innovative
things, like Steam and Linux gaming, in the face of standard thinking
because there's no managers to say 'no', only peers :)

>tools-pmc mailing list

Back to the top