Community
Participate
Working Groups
I've updated the final plan for Neon and also updated the appendix with the BREE information. Please review the draft: http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?planurl=http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/development/plans/eclipse_project_plan_4_6_draft.xml
+1
I'll updated the Target Environments (and JREs) today.
Bug links here are broken, map to https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=TBD (new) (committed) Improve PDE editors. PDE wants to further improve its Target editor and enhance the performance in all PDE editors. [PDE] (482576 and 482640)
n additions seems to be a typo: ---- n addition, JDT will work to further improve content assist in the Java editor.
+1 to the rest
(In reply to Lars Vogel from comment #5) > Bug links here are broken, map to > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=TBD > > (new) (committed) Improve PDE editors. PDE wants to further improve its > Target editor and enhance the performance in all PDE editors. [PDE] (482576 > and 482640) Thanks. Fixed. Also updated the last revised year to 2016.
(In reply to Dani Megert from comment #4) > I'll updated the Target Environments (and JREs) today. I have it ready but we need to discuss the following two items: - SWT would replace Windows 8 with Windows 10 (keep popular Windows 7) - SWT would like to drop Ubuntu LTS 12.04 (support only 14.04 and 16.04)
(In reply to Dani Megert from comment #9) > (In reply to Dani Megert from comment #4) > > I'll updated the Target Environments (and JREs) today. > > I have it ready but we need to discuss the following two items: > > - SWT would replace Windows 8 with Windows 10 (keep popular Windows 7) > - SWT would like to drop Ubuntu LTS 12.04 (support only 14.04 and 16.04) The PMC approved this in today's call. The target platforms are now updated. PMC members, please have a look. I want to publish the plan on Friday.
+1 looks good to me, though I have 3 comments: 1. OSX 10.11 -- It is a committed Plan Item to work on OSX 10.11 , yet the reference Platforms still list OSX 10.10 as the one -- that seems inconsistent to me, should the reference platform update to 10.11 ? 2. XULRunner 38 support is marked as "deferred" in the plan, but respective bug 474625 is actually marked WONTFIX. Should the language be clearer in the Plan that this is not only deferred but actually not planned any more ? 3. Robustness "UI Enhancements" and "UI Performance / Stability" are unfortunately not backed by bugzilla's, though it would be interesting to read what has been done. Would it be reasonable adding a container bug with dependencies on the most relevant work that has been done ... or was it just too much ?
OK strike the OSX one, looks like it was updated while I was writing the comment :)
(In reply to Martin Oberhuber from comment #11) > 2. XULRunner 38 support is marked as "deferred" in the plan, but respective > bug 474625 is actually marked WONTFIX. Should the language be clearer in > the > Plan that this is not only deferred but actually not planned any more ? XULRunner 38 is WONTFIX, but the general item "browser currency" is only deferred. It will just be another version. > 3. Robustness "UI Enhancements" and "UI Performance / Stability" are > unfortunately > not backed by bugzilla's, though it would be interesting to read what has > been > done. Would it be reasonable adding a container bug with dependencies on > the > most relevant work that has been done ... or was it just too much ? Too much. Almost every bug fix in Platform UI contributes to this.
I've published the plan and sent a note to eclipse-dev and cross-project-issues-dev.
