Re: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java Code G

["Pascal Rapicault" <pascal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

When it comes to OSS, very few large companies have the maturity level
that Ericsson or others have, and in those not-too-OSS-savvy companies it 
is easier for a manager to ask for a finite budget to purchase tools (and
remember also that they will get a significant discount), than having the
discussion to hire in house developers or consultant to fix or build the
tool they need.
On top of that when you buy a tool, you get immediate result, and if
something goes wrong you get professional support and don’t have to wait
for a committer to answer (because remember that nobody will ever be
committer on all projects so even if I’m committer on project A I will
still use project B).

Over the years of being involved with commercial software tools, I have
always been surprised by the amount of people who were ready to spend
money even on a free tool, either to buy “piece of mind”, to ensure
continued improvement of the tool, fix some minor glitches, etc. In fact
some companies are even be ready to pay for new features to be developed
in the OSS.
Unfortunately at Eclipse we don’t offer that in any form or others.

Earlier we were talking about how to fund developers at the foundation? I
think that if the foundation was willing to sell Eclipse support, then
this would most likely pay for a couple developers and support ppl, etc.
that could contribute to improve the status quo and hear first-hand of the
users problem (and those that we get in bugs are not representative of the
mass of developers behind corporate doors, for example how many
ericsson.com email addresses do we have in BZ when ericsson internally has
over 10,000 eclipse users).
I realize that there is chicken-and-egg problem with that approach, but
imo it worth being tried.


On Fri, September 20, 2013 14:42, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
> John,
>
>
>
> It has been a while since I have been on The Board, but if the current
> objections are all financial, then that illustrates a change in thinking
> and
> is a good sign.
>
>
>
> Part of the reason that fundraising has been difficult is that it is
> difficult to show value of EF membership. This can be remedied if EF has
> developers on payroll. Not only would membership give you a vote in
> setting
> the direction for these developers, but there could be other benefits. Say
> annual points that the member can spend to ensure that specific problems
> affecting them are addressed.
>
>
>
> We could also be doing more to explore fundraising from end users. How
> about
> "sponsor a bug" that's integrated directly into bugzilla? The funds are
> held
> in an escrow until the solution is delivered. EF or ecosystem developers
> can
> fix the issue. If an ecosystem developer fixes the issue, EF takes a cut
> for
> facilitating the transaction.
>
>
>
> - Konstantin
>
>
>
>
>
> From: ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of John Arthorne
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 11:06 AM
> To: Discussions about the IDE
> Subject: Re: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java
> Code Geeks
>
>
>
>> From: "Konstantin Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> We already have a system for organizing interested parties around
>> Eclipse,
>> pooling resources, etc., but we refuse to let The Foundation hire actual
>> developers, believing (incorrectly) that a diverse ecosystem is always
>> better.
>
> This has been discussed in depth within the Eclipse Board, and at least in
> the last two years I have not heard that argument used against the idea.
> There is a brief summary of one such instance at [1]. The main sticking
> point on this idea has been finding a stable source of funding for it.
> Developers are expensive, and the Foundation in its current form doesn't
> have the long term financial backing to fund development. I would love to
> hear anyone's ideas on this (either in public or private), and as a
> committer representative on the Board I would be happy to bring ideas
> forward there.
>
> John
>
> [1]
> <http://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/boardminutes/2012_10_22_Minutes.php>
> http://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/boardminutes/2012_10_22_Minutes.php
>
> _______________________________________________
> ide-dev mailing list
> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>