IMO it seems that q4e and m2eclipse has finally lit a fire in the eclipse
community to bring quality maven support to the IDE.  So, hooray for both!

On Dec 17, 2007 1:04 PM, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> On 17 Dec 07, at 11:57 AM 17 Dec 07, Andy Dingfelder wrote:
>
> > Before folks flame Mark, I would point out that he really asked
> > multiple questions, some of which are versy good:
> >
> > 1  (RE the proposal to make q4e the eclipse standard) What are
> > people's thoughts about this?
>
> Just a brief note as not to incite panic.
>
> 1. Q4E making a proposal at Eclipse by doesn't, by any stretch of the
> imagination, mean that it's going to be official anything. The
> proposal has been accepted, that doesn't mean it's been accepted as a
> project. So becoming an official project is a hurdle and I have
> already talked with folks like Jeff McAffer, and Mike Milinkovich
> about bringing m2eclipse to Eclipse.
>
> 2. Q4E has no paid developers, while Sonatype has recently started
> paying developers to work full-time on the integration.
>
> 3. Q4E has zero diversity, go look at the proposal. The draft proposal
> for m2eclipse has the support of many large companies, and many
> organizations that want to integrate m2eclipse. Theses companies have
> zero interest in Q4E. And I mean big companies.
>
> 4. Any project once at Eclipse goes through a long process to get
> included into the platform. That will not happen for at least a year.
> The fastest turn around time for a technology project getting into the
> platform is 18 months for Mylyn. This is not a short process. The
> proposal for Q4E being accepted really means nothing. They don't have
> any mentors and until such a time the project won't be accepted. Folks
> at Eclipse know my intention to submit a proposal. So there might be
> some initial mumblings, but when people see our proposal and the
> support we have there isn't going to be any questions what codebase
> will be the official one.
>
> 5. No one working on Q4E actually does anything on the Maven project.
> The folks working on the embedder, or the technology used to embed
> Maven, are myself, and John Casey primarily. So it's not likely any
> other project is going be able to effectively do the work. So Sonatype
> pays people full-time to work on Maven and to work on the integration.
>
> 6. My personal opinion is that Q4E is a failed marketing tactic by a
> failed attempt at a company and won't be going anywhere soon.  I
> wouldn't put much credence in the blogosphere and marketing FUD.
>
> 7. I plan to support m2eclipse for a long time. That's means real
> dollars and continued work on Maven's core to support the integration
> effort.
>
> >
> >
> > I think this is the most particularly relevant question asked and
> > needs more discussion
> >
> > 2.  Have you used Q4E, what did you think?
> >
> > As Eugene pointed out, we don't want to spend a lot of time here
> > discussing the pros and cons of q4e, thats what their mailing list
> > is for.  The last thing we want is for q4e folks to get defensive on
> > these lists if folks here post negative items about q4e.
> > Having said that, discussions centered around comparisons between
> > the 2 products perhaps may not be welcome on their list either, so
> > where does such a discussion belong?   Perhaps someone needs a blog
> > or 3rd party "neutral" area where a comparison could be presented.
> >
> > 3.  Will this (eventually) mean the end of m2eclipse?
> >
> > I saw Eugene's response (As for m2eclipse, there are no plans to
> > discontinue the project.) and I hope this holds true for a long time.
> >
> > The important thing to consider here is that this type of situation
> > has already occurred in eclipse and we need to be ready for it as
> > well.  Consider subversion for example, where there have been 2
> > competing projects (Subclipse vs Subversive) fighting for entry as
> > an "official" part of eclipse.
> >
> > So, I leave you with a question:
> >
> > Do we "allow" q4e to be unchallenged as the only official maven
> > integrator?  or do put m2 forward as well as a candidate?
> >
> > My feel is that if they DO get added as the sole "official" maven
> > plugin, we will have a hard time getting people to use m2 as a 3rd
> > party plugin.  Why would people bother adding an extra plugin if a
> > different one already does the job by default?
> >
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > Please consider the environment before printing this email
> >
> > WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or
> > privileged.
> > They are intended for the addressee only and are not to be read,
> > used, copied or
> > disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If you are not the
> > intended recipient,
> > please notify the sender by return email and delete this message and
> > any attachments.
> >
> > The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not
> > necessarily reflect
> > the official views of SirTrack. see   http://www.sirtrack.com
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
> >
> >    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder,  Apache Maven
> jason at sonatype dot com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>

Reply via email to