Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support

2018-06-02 Thread MG 

Hi Daniil,

I have voted for the Groovy 3.0 Features child issues 
(https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050#tab=Linked%20Issues).


Cheers,
mg


On 02.06.2018 15:52, Daniil Ovchinnikov wrote:
none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue seems to 
have any votes

Yep, I should’ve clarified this earlier and invited users to vote.


in the end I myself would just upvote every child issue
And this is good. It’s much better than to upvote parent task and 
forget about it.
At least you will get a notification when each task is closed contrary 
to umbrella task that may remain open for a long time.



I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first

That’s what I’m now doing with 3.0 tasks. But upvotes do matter.

—

Daniil Ovchinnikov
JetBrains


On 2 Jun 2018, at 02:30, MG > wrote:


I just checked, and none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 
umbrella issue (https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050) 
seems to have any votes. I find that not surprising: As a developer 
that uses Groovy in place of Java to develop a larger framework using 
IntelliJ IDE, I can only use a Groovy feature once it has gotten 
proper IntelliJ support. I can toy around with it before that, of 
course, but to e.g. to finally be able to get rid of using the 
new-keyword in my project, IntelliJ support is tantamount. Other new 
features will be useful in different ways, other again I will have to 
check out further, to find where I can use them best. That makes a 
meaningful pioritization hard - in the end I myself would just upvote 
every child issue...


Others may see this differently of course, but I need support for all 
features, as fast as possible ;-)


To prioritize, I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first.
(Or once you have create the technicl child issues in the way you 
need them structured, you can ask people to vote between 2 or 3 
issues here / the Groovy Slack... (unless Paul/Jochen/Guillaume/... 
object, of course).)


It would be interesting to learn a little bit about the effort that 
goes into certain features, btw,

Cheers,
mg


On 01.06.2018 23:51, mg wrote:

Hi Daniil,

I am a bit confused here: For Groovy 3.0 someone created a similar 
issue, people voted on it to show that Groovy 3.0 feature support 
was important to them, you created a handful of child issues, and 
everything seemed well & fine :-)

How is this different then ?

Cheers,
mg


 Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
Von: Daniil Ovchinnikov 
Datum: 01.06.18 22:42 (GMT+01:00)
An: users@groovy.apache.org
Betreff: Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support

Hi mg,

First of all thank you for caring.

I just want to let you know that such abstract tickets have almost 
zero meaning other than serving as a parent for other smaller tasks.
It would be much more helpful to prioritize if you create a ticket 
for some particular feature and let others vote for it.


—

Daniil Ovchinnikov
JetBrains


On 1 Jun 2018, at 21:09, MG > wrote:


Hi,

I have created a Jetbrains issue you can vote on for IntelliJ to 
fully support Groovy 2.5 as soon as possible :-)


https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-193168

Cheers,
mg

Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support

2018-06-02 Thread Daniil Ovchinnikov 
> none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue seems to have any 
> votes
Yep, I should’ve clarified this earlier and invited users to vote. 

> in the end I myself would just upvote every child issue
And this is good. It’s much better than to upvote parent task and forget about 
it.
At least you will get a notification when each task is closed contrary to 
umbrella task that may remain open for a long time.

> I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first
That’s what I’m now doing with 3.0 tasks. But upvotes do matter.

—

Daniil Ovchinnikov
JetBrains


> On 2 Jun 2018, at 02:30, MG  wrote:
> 
> I just checked, and none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue 
> (https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050 
> ) seems to have any votes. 
> I find that not surprising: As a developer that uses Groovy in place of Java 
> to develop a larger framework using IntelliJ IDE, I can only use a Groovy 
> feature once it has gotten proper IntelliJ support. I can toy around with it 
> before that, of course, but to e.g. to finally be able to get rid of using 
> the new-keyword in my project, IntelliJ support is tantamount. Other new 
> features will be useful in different ways, other again I will have to check 
> out further, to find where I can use them best. That makes a meaningful 
> pioritization hard - in the end I myself would just upvote every child 
> issue...
> 
> Others may see this differently of course, but I need support for all 
> features, as fast as possible ;-)
> 
> To prioritize, I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first. 
> (Or once you have create the technicl child issues in the way you need them 
> structured, you can ask people to vote between 2 or 3 issues here / the 
> Groovy Slack... (unless Paul/Jochen/Guillaume/... object, of course).)
> 
> It would be interesting to learn a little bit about the effort that goes into 
> certain features, btw,
> Cheers,
> mg
> 
> 
> On 01.06.2018 23:51, mg wrote:
>> Hi Daniil,
>> 
>> I am a bit confused here: For Groovy 3.0 someone created a similar issue, 
>> people voted on it to show that Groovy 3.0 feature support was important to 
>> them, you created a handful of child issues, and everything seemed well & 
>> fine :-)
>> How is this different then ?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> mg
>> 
>> 
>>  Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
>> Von: Daniil Ovchinnikov  
>> 
>> Datum: 01.06.18 22:42 (GMT+01:00)
>> An: users@groovy.apache.org 
>> Betreff: Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support
>> 
>> Hi mg,
>> 
>> First of all thank you for caring.
>> 
>> I just want to let you know that such abstract tickets have almost zero 
>> meaning other than serving as a parent for other smaller tasks.
>> It would be much more helpful to prioritize if you create a ticket for some 
>> particular feature and let others vote for it.
>> 
>> —
>> 
>> Daniil Ovchinnikov
>> JetBrains
>> 
>> 
>>> On 1 Jun 2018, at 21:09, MG >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I have created a Jetbrains issue you can vote on for IntelliJ to fully 
>>> support Groovy 2.5 as soon as possible :-)
>>> 
>>> https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-193168 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> mg
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>