Alright: Pending other opinions we then have the following base download sites:
http://download.eclipse.org/technology/nebula http://download.eclipse.org/technology/nebula/ci http://download.eclipse.org/technology/incubation/ci Pending the NatTable project discussion this would be: http://download.eclipse.org/technology/nebula/nattable http://download.eclipse.org/technology/nebula/nattable/ci Everybody cool about these names? Regards, Wim On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Mickael Istria < [email protected]> wrote: > ** > On 01/12/2011 14:47, Wim Jongman wrote: > > > Nightly *was* a standard word in the Eclipse community, it reminds me >> the time when people could not poll SCM and before continuous integration >> existed, and everyone used PDE/Build... That's now a freaky word for me: a >> project that only builds once a night is not healthy. >> Latest is interesting, but latest what? latest release, latest test >> build...? It is not precise enough I think. >> >> I could advocate for Snapshots for years, we probably need more opinions >> rather than debating for weeks just the 2 of us ;) >> > > How about "continuous" then. > > I'd be OK for "continuous-integration" or "ci". The first one is probably > better for people who do not know CI... poor them. > Deal? > > > > We could also include some eclipse release name. (indigo/helios) >> >> Hopefully we will provide builds that would work with 3.5 and later. >> Binding a build to the name of a release will make people think that the >> release is a requirement for installation. >> > > Yes, but at some point this will no longer work. Because it is a matter > of time before people start using touch API and/or restyling and other > stuff that will break compatibility with older SWT releases. > > So let's wait for this time to happen. Maybe having a compatibility table > on the download area with the list of releases for Nebula and the list of > releases for Eclipse with green checks or red cross in it would be easier > to maintain and clearer for consumers. > Also, I think that incompatibility will only happen happer for a few > Nebula widgets. In that case, we should not prevent someone on a old 3.5 > Eclipse to install (let's stay) the latest version TableCombo just because > the latest Gallery would only support 3.8+... > > Having "normal" numeric versioning + a compatibility table for widgets > could be clearer. > > > I also want to think about things as long term support (LTS) where we > must be able to fix Nebula bugs against older versions of Eclipse (but that > is a separate discussion). > > That's a topic I did not think about, and I am not very aware of; but it > is indeed very important... I'm clueless. > > > Regards, > -- > > Mickael Istria > R&D Engineer, Eclipse Plug-in RCP Developer > > PetalsLink <http://www.petalslink.com> - Open Source SOA > > My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My > Tweets<https://twitter.com/#%21/mickaelistria> > > _______________________________________________ > nebula-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev > >
_______________________________________________ nebula-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
