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