| Re: [science-iwg] Top Level Project update |
|
On 2016-04-20 05:01 PM, Erwin de Ley
wrote:
Mike. An external repo or Market Place etc were indeed what we were also thinking about. Absolutely. But the converse also ends up being true: cramming too much function and every possible dependency into the initial product causes a different set of problems. The venerable Eclipse IDE lived through all of these various decision points. My recommendation to you is to think pretty hard about what is the base platform, and the minimal set of useful functions to provide a solid out of box experience. But then think about how to encourage an ecosystem that adds value on top of that. You know things are working well when groups you've never heard of start publishing add-ons to your platform. Also, if the Science WG or our projects end up needing to host own "more-or-less-eclipsy" repository, wouldn't that be perceived as being part of the eclipse ecosystem anyway? There is a massive difference between what actually ships as part of the Eclipse projects, and the ecosystem that grows up around them. The Eclipse bits are expected to be IP clean. The ecosystem is completely laissez faire. We do not vet anything. Eclipse Marketplace is actually not a repository. It is a catalogue that points to many repositories hosted elsewhere by others. We did that precisely to provide the maximum amount of flexibility to the ecosystem, while also providing an easy to find place and a great install experience. HTH. |