Re: [e4-dev] Forward compatibility instead of backwards compatibility? (

[Jeff McAffer <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Missed the call but some comments...

On 12-Aug-09, at 11:42 AM, Mike Wilson wrote:

This seems like a perfect discussion topic for the call tomorrow.

McQ.

<graycol.gif>Oleg Besedin---12/08/2009 11:38:19---The major part of the E4 effort has (and will be) centered on achieving backward compatibility. That means that half the people

---

The major part of the E4 effort has (and will be) centered on achieving backward compatibility. That means that half the people, instead of working on new things, work on backward compatibility.
Can we ever make E4 smaller and simpler then 3.x while maintaining 3.x functionality? (And if we can, why not just do it in the 3.x stream?)

I think there is a solution to that. What if we consider introducing E4 as a runtime platform rather than the development platform?

I am of course biased but to me e4 is a runtime platform.  We will happen to build Eclipse 4.0 on top of it but e4 is the new RCP not the new SDK IMHO.  It could be quite reasonable for people to use Eclipse 3.6 SDKs to develop e4 based apps.  As Tom pointed out on another post this would likely be a PDE effort to allow the e4 team to plug the appropriate launching (and other) support into 3.6.  This kind of support has been requested in other contexts as well.

FWIW I think this would be a very useful approach to encourage and sustain adoption of e4.

Jeff