On 11/24/2014 09:16 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
If it is not available in Mars we can't really depend on it
start bundling it and then we own the maintaence of It risking others
will bundle other versions and we'll be incompatible. It is bad enough
there now are multiple terminals, but multiple ways to define and
connect to remote hosts for file transferring. That would be a mess.
Why not simply
contributing to the project in case we have things to
contribute? I don't understand why being in Mars/not being in Mars makes
a difference about how to contribute to this project and how much we can
rely on it.
It's just that current contibutors are resigning from this project, it
doesn't require anyone to fork it.
So sure, there are hacks for bundling this in. None of them are
sustainable if the project is looking for termination.
If we don't want
project to terminate, and if multiple people need it,
then it's up to its adopters (including us) to affirm that we are ready
to make the necessary efforts to provide and review patches to keep the
project somehow alive. Given the maturity of the project, it shouldn't
represent too much work to keep it alive.
Things will be a mess only if we let them be a mess, but just not
changing anything to current state of the project would be enough to
avoid that mess.
However, if there is a better replacement, it may be a good time to use
the better one; but if there is not, then we should IMO step up and say
that we don't want project to terminate.
why are we using their dedicated repo and not the release train as we
do for other things ? To get source for Dev to or?
Yes, I think so, on Rob's
Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools>
My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com>
- My Tweets