<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Hello All<br><br>Next step could be Eclipse bug when the time is appropriate<br><br><div>> From: manderse@redhat.com<br>> To: paul.verest@live.com<br>> CC: mistria@redhat.com; angelo.zerr@gmail.com; jbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.org<br>> Subject: Re: [jbosstools-dev] Eclipse process vs just OSS RE: Nodeclipse IDE (or components) in JBoss Tools?<br>> Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 16:08:17 +0200<br>> <br>> On 22 May 2014, at 12:15, Paul Verest wrote:<br>> <br>> > Hi Michael<br>> ><br>> > Just want to add that Eclipse is regarded by some as some overhead.<br>> <br>> yes, and if you don't want to do that overhead you can't expect to be <br>> integrated<br>> in overall solutions. That is fine and complete fair to say.</div><div><br></div><div>It is great that we agree about overhead. When it is said openly and with exact additional steps,</div><div>that would make it clear and comprehensive.</div><div><br>> <br>> > Maybe simple explanation and success example can show that it s easy.<br>> <br>> vert.x is at eclipse now - yes, there is overhead but github is used for <br>> contributions.<br>> <br>> > (Especially with cases when code/interactions continues to be on <br>> > GitHub)<br>> > And that would be one more nice addition to what is missing on <br>> > eclipse.org site.<br>> <br>> What page are you looking at where this is not highlighted enough ?</div><div><br></div><div>I don't know URLs to concise answer to this thread topic.</div><div><br>> <br>> > Contributing on GitHub I myself ran into situation when PR are not <br>> > even commented for a month or two.<br>> <br>> Yes? that is same wether in or outside eclipse. It is wether there are <br>> people working actively enough on projects.<br>> <br>> /max<br>> > Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 12:35:29 +0200<br>> > From: mistria@redhat.com<br>> > To: paul.verest@live.com; angelo.zerr@gmail.com<br>> > CC: jbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.org<br>> > Subject: Re: [jbosstools-dev] Nodeclipse IDE (or components) in JBoss <br>> > Tools?<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Hi Paul,<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > On 05/20/2014 12:09 PM, Paul Verest wrote:<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > I suggest to lobby that Eclipse would recognize<br>> > non-Eclipse.org projects under EPL license as valuable part of<br>> > Eclipse eco-system<br>> ><br>> > MarketPlace was done to fulfill this goal and it works pretty well.<br>> > Some non Eclipse.org project have been pretty successful thanks to<br>> > MarketPlace and MarketPlace client. I think those should thank the<br>> > Foundation for that.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > that Eclipse project committers should be aware of, give<br>> > and take help.<br>> > e.g. https://github.com/eclipse-color-theme/eclipse-color-theme<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > The issue with the multiplication of projects out of Eclipse.org is<br>> > that you end up with different process to contribute and don't have<br>> > the guarantee a contribution would be appreciated and considered.<br>> > Being on GitHub is not a proof of an open development process, it's<br>> > "just" OSS code. That's why it makes sense for<br>> > contributors/consumers (like us) to encourage projects to become<br>> > official Eclipse projects. Eclipse Foundation has set up rules that<br>> > ensure a really open development process and that guarantee that a<br>> > project can't be locked, and that encourage contributions over<br>> > forks. It makes things safer.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Something like open letter from Eclipse Foundation to<br>> > Eclipse plugins authors.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > That's probably a good idea.<br>> ><br>> > Maybe the Foundation (or the community in general) should make it<br>> > more official that projects on GitHub/MarketPlace are welcome to<br>> > become official Eclipse projects and explain to authors that being<br>> > an Eclipse.org project is a sign of real openness and a generator of<br>> > success.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > But in any way, I can fully understand from the Foundation POV and<br>> > from our "consumer" POV, that there is and will always be a<br>> > distinction between Eclipse.org and non-Eclipse.org projects. The<br>> > Foundation rules are definitely something good, that make a<br>> > difference.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Please also help to connect to Red Hat China managers or<br>> > marketing.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Unfortunately, I don't know anyone in Red Hat office in China. Maybe<br>> > Rob (Stryker) can help.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > @Angelo Would this email get into jbosstools-dev list?<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Yes, it's on. And this answer too. Check you CC list before sending<br>> > mails ;)<br>> ><br>> > --<br>> ><br>> > Mickael Istria<br>> ><br>> > Eclipse developer at JBoss,<br>> > by Red Hat<br>> ><br>> > My blog - My Tweets <br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > jbosstools-dev mailing list<br>> > jbosstools-dev@lists.jboss.org<br>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosstools-dev<br>> <br>> <br>> /max<br>> http://about.me/maxandersen<br></div> </div></body>
</html>