Community
Participate
Working Groups
This is very similar to our current "wst" zip, but improve the packaging aspects a little. Plus, I'm not sure if we need the WSDL tools that are currently in the wst zips. This should be partially determined by what adopters need, and partially by what the intended audience is. The intended audience, in my mind, are those wanting to develop and deploy HTML and CSS "web apps" to basic servers. I _think_ WSDL development is for more advanced users/uses ... but, I need others to educate me on audience/tool implications. To make our "WST zip" into a complete "product", some additional items would help: Capabilities bundle: I suggest a small plugin to define the capabilities in. We currently have some capabilities in "org.eclipse.wst" plugins that should be in their own bundle for this specific sort of limited install. Product plugin: Long term, we'd want a "branding" plugin and product configuration file which could hold icons, a splash screen, initial perspective, etc. Web IDE feature: I suggest the name org.eclipse.wst.web.ide.feature (not sure we really need an org.eclipse.wst.web.ide_sdk.feature, but maybe, just for symmetry). The Web ide feature would, basically, just include the capabilities bundle and the product plugin _and_ the existing wst features (with possible exception of the wsdl related items). It would exist mostly for easier building and packaging on our download page. Those adopting us in larger products (and indeed, even larger deliverables from WTP) would not include any of these bundles or ide feature ... they would just include the "meaty" part of the component (which already exists). The actual list of capabilities, though, would be merged in similar capabilities bundles in those larger products. I could do the basic features, but someone else would have to fill in meaningful capabilities.
I am blindly closing old bugs as "won't fix" (I selected those opened over two years ago, mostly opened by me, with no comments made in past couple of years). This is entirely an effort to focus on relevant bugs ... so if anyone sees any of these old bugs closed as "won't fix" that _are_ still relevant, do feel free to reopen. It would be much appreciated to know it was still important and deserves some attention beyond a blind close. Apologies in advance for closing any prematurely.
