>> 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.
It is great that we agree about overhead. When it is said openly and
with exact additional steps,that would make it clear and
comprehensive.
Funny enough i'm not really following what you mean with "said openly
and with exact additional steps" ?
You want someone from
eclipse.org to say "The Eclipse process might be
perceived as heavy and not for everyone - but that is OK." ?
>> 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 ?
I don't know URLs to concise answer to this thread topic.
Okey but you said it is somehow missing on
eclipse.org so i'm just
wondering where you have been looking ?
Here is first hits I get when searching
eclipse.org github:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/GitHub
searching on the wiki gives you details on how you hook up the CLA
check:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Social_Coding/Hosting_a_Project_at_GitHub
and
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources explains it too.
and finally the most central page on this is probably
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Social_Coding
What is the page/info you feel are missing in the above ?
I think the problem you are seeing is a perception problem and that
eclipse.org actually have gone
a long way since many years ago. Yes, there is still a process, and yes
it is heavy at times when you need
to check your dependencies are actually clean - but in day to day work
it is really not different than
any other project.
/max
http://about.me/maxandersen