----- Original Message ----- > From: "Konstantin Komissarchik" <[email protected]> > To: "Cross project issues" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:55:39 PM > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2 > > > The real problem is "the platform team" vanishes :((. Unless the > > broad community steps in to strengthen it we are done. > > The platform team isn't going to vanish unless Eclipse vanishes.
Eclipse can still be here for some time with no platform team. We see it with pde.build already - it's here, it's shipped, it's long way from good enough and there are no active contributors. > There may > not be demand for a large group of platform contributors because the > foundation is good enough and now it's time to build the chimney. I beg to differ here - platform(incl. swt, p2, etc.) is so long way from "good enough" state that I can't even consider this statement seriously. Alexander Kurtakov Red Hat Eclipse team > > To try to get back on topic... The Planning Council is responsible > for > establishing the simultaneous release and resolving cross-project > issues > that arise. The topic of whether Juno should be 3.8 or 4.2 based (or > both) > was on the agenda for many meetings last year. Perhaps this should be > on the > agenda again for the next meeting? > > http://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council > > - Konstantin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Aleksandar Kurtakov > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 4:17 AM > To: Cross project issues > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Konstantin Komissarchik" > > <[email protected]> > > To: "Cross project issues" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:13:41 PM > > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2 > > > > > "The one that does the job decides!" > > > > Indeed, but the rest of that quote is "and accepts consequences for > > those decisions". > > > > I do not believe that the broad community is disinterested in > > helping > > 4.x in reaching maturity. This thread and others like it are simply > > a > > call to slow down and to do this more safely. It would not be wise > > for > > the platform team to disregard these calls. > > The real problem is "the platform team" vanishes :((. Unless the > broad > community steps in to strengthen it we are done. > > Alexander Kurtakov > Red Hat Eclipse team > > > > > - Konstantin > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > > Aleksandar Kurtakov > > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 4:02 AM > > To: Cross project issues > > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2 > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Stephan Herrmann" <[email protected]> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:40:02 PM > > > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus > > > 4.2 > > > > > > On 09/06/2012 08:23 AM, Thomas Hallgren wrote: > > > > Introducing a new platform undoubtedly consumes a lot of > > > > resources. > > > > Doing that anyway (and as the only viable alternative), well > > > > aware > > > > that those resources were scarce and that the new platform had > > > > inferior performance, and then blame the community for not > > > > helping, that doesn't fly well with me. > > > > > > Maybe the problem is, "the community" isn't quite as homogeneous > > > as > > > we keep thinking. 3.8 vs. 4.2 is a conflict of interests between > > > different groups of people. > > > > > > If you are part of the group that only sees regressions not a > > > single > > > improvement in 4.2, it's difficult to get motivated helping those > > > other guys getting their baby up to speed. Of course those who > > > greatly benefit from the new architecture don't want to get > > > slowed > > > down by "legacy" decisions. > > > > > > Lets call one group the IDE nerds and the other group the e4-RCP > > > folks. > > > As a thought experiment: are the e4-RCP folks strong enough in > > > resources to make 4.3 a replacement that will not get into faces > > > of > > > the IDE nerds? > > > > What about e4-RCP folks outnumber the IDE nerds significantly > > (amongst > > active contributors) so it's there call. > > "The one that does the job decides!" > > > > Alexander Kurtakov > > Red Hat Eclipse team > > > > > > > > > > I don't know the answer, but I feel the answer differs depending > > > on > > > whether you focus on functionality, bugs, performance or > > > usability. > > > > > > Yes, we are still one community, and I'm not advocating fences > > > and > > > boundaries, but helping each other seems to work best when cost > > > and > > > benefits are equally balanced in all regions of this community. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 09/06/2012 07:06 AM, Pascal Rapicault wrote: > > > > But more importantly than all this is the meta conclusion that > > > > > > > > the > > > > era of being able to take the platform for granted is over and > > > > > > > > that > we are all going to have to pay more attention to it, > > > roll > > > up our > sleeves and contribute. > > > > > > I'd like to second this. No part of the entire ecosystem can be > > > taken for granted, not the platform, not jdt, not p2, nor the > > > team > > > providers. > > > All components need continued care and everybody needs help (no > > > sarcasm intended, in case anyone wonders). > > > > > > cheers, > > > Stephan > > > > > > PS: Great to see efforts to bring performance tests back! Thanks! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
