On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:22 PM Ernie Rael <err...@raelity.com> wrote:
> The point is that depending on a 3rd party project for functionality > that NetBeans provides is a problem. But there is push back to provide > even simple maven archetypes. And, at least possibly until now, little > interest in supplying archetypes from NetBeans project. > Then, quite frankly, the baby should be tossed out with the bathwater. If there's going to be this clash between the NB project and 3rd parties, then NB should abandon anything related to third parties that they're unwilling to maintain. Using your Java FX example, if the Java FX new project functionality is that tied to a 3rd party artifact(s) that NB is unwilling/unable to maintain, then the "New FX Project" functionality should be ripped out, and let the FX project perhaps be aware of it. Then the FX project, should they so desire, can create a NB plugin that can be installed by users that then enable "New FX Project" functions, plus whatever else they want to add. It's a disservice to everyone to go half way. Again, here's something the IDE is providing that the NB team and contributors can not fix. To quote Dr. Venkman: "That's bad." Now it would be a nice gift to wrap up the current FX tech in to a nice project bundle that could be handed off to a/the 3rd party, to lower the barrier to entry to get this going. But, it's just not right to leave stuff dangling, ramshackled and broken with no real path to fix them. I think having these broken things makes the project look bad. NB used to be very polished. It was known for it's "one stop shopping". Download it, and shazam, you got all of this stuff and functionality. No crawling the internet, following blogs, downloading jars from who knows where. But instead a nice, integrated "look at all the stuff that can be done". That agenda and mission has clearly changed, however formal or informally it's been stated. I don't have any experience really with the other IDEs. I don't know if OpenFX is doing addons for Eclipse or IDEA or, well, anything. I don't know if it's necessary. But having these options in the IDE that flat out don't work, doesn't do anyone any good. They give the wrong impression that the IDE supports something. They don't work when used, and issues to fix them fall on deaf ears, which also looks bad. The ecosystem is bitrotting around us. There should also be a conversation about what functionality the team is willing to maintain, and which it feels should be up to 3rd parties and should be yanked out, and perhaps how that transition could be accomplished. Regards, Will Hartung
