Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive wordi

[Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I guess one question, is that really the Foundation’s role? Is it not up to us, the community, to make sure the messaging is clear?

Though I’m not as worried about that at the moment. I gave a short talk to a local Ottawa IoT meetup and used the term “Eclipse” and they knew exactly what I was talking about, using Eclipse to program their Arduinos. And they rather liked the idea :).

Aside from that, the language server protocol is a great initiative and something our tooling really needs. Don’t forget Red Hat is also a major player here and I think we’ll all benefit from it.

Doug.

From: <cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Konstantin Komissarchik <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 12:11 PM
To: "cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] CodeEnvy continues to use deceptive wording that's harmful to Eclipse

I was just reading the latest Microsoft/RedHat/Codenvy press release and came across the problematic wording that we’ve seen before.

 

Microsoft Visual Studio Code and Eclipse Che, the next-generation Eclipse IDE, have added support for the protocol.

 

https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-codenvy-and-microsoft-collaborate-language-server-protocol

 

I think it’s great that Eclipse Foundation is getting more technologically diverse, but I find it very concerning that Eclipse Foundation is allowing Codenvy/Che to continue to use wording like this. Current Eclipse users will read this statement as an official statement of the roadmap for the desktop Eclipse IDE or whatever the hell we are supposed to call it now that Eclipse IDE doesn’t mean anything, apparently.

 

I understand why Codenvy would use wording like this as it helps them to promote Che. What I don’t understand is why Eclipse Foundation, through inaction, is allowing this to continue.

 

Thanks,

 

- Konstantin