Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting?

+1

On 16.03.2016 16:23, Wayne Beaton wrote:
> If you haven't already, please read this:
> 
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/ide-dev/msg01071.html
> 
> In this long run, this is good for us.
> 
> I just noticed that Codenvy doesn't have a representative on the Architecture Council. As a
> Strategic Developer, they should have one. It'd be good to have them involved in this conversation.
> I'll start the process to make that happen.
> 
> Wayne
> 
> 
> On 15/03/16 10:54 PM, Jay Jay Billings wrote:
>> What I don't understand is why we can't market both? They cover different spaces and we can
>> delineate them. Che is for institutional cloud-based installs and Eclipse is for the single
>> workstation. This is the difference between Che being "the" next generation Eclipse IDE and it
>> being "a" next generation Eclipse IDE.
>>
>> I think I would personally be happy if the Che guys just left some marketing room for Eclipse and
>> stopped making it sound like everyone was jumping ship.
>>
>> One cool thing we could do would be to make a YouTube video showing someone doing a project in Che
>> and then connecting to it with Eclipse and SSH. Tyler didn't go into detail about how to do that,
>> but he mentioned it a lot. Then we could be talking more about convergence.
>>
>> Jay
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Jay Jay Billings <jayjaybillings@xxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:jayjaybillings@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>>     I'm going to change the subject on this thread and wax philosophically about technical ideas
>>     related to the IDE because I don't want to interfere with this discussion.
>>
>>     Jay
>>
>>     On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik
>>     <<mailto:konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>         The other angle to consider is how this plays out at management level. It’s very difficult
>>         to argue that you need more resources to work on Eclipse IDE when the management sees
>>         Eclipse Foundation at least tacitly endorsing something else as a path forward.
>>
>>          
>>
>>         I don’t recall similarly problematic messaging when Orion was getting started.
>>
>>          
>>
>>         Thanks,
>>
>>          
>>
>>         - Konstantin
>>
>>          
>>
>>          
>>
>>         *From: *Doug Schaefer <mailto:cdtdoug@xxxxxxxxx>
>>         *Sent: *Tuesday, March 15, 2016 10:01 AM
>>         *To: *eclipse.org-architecture-council <mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>
>>         *Subject: *Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting?
>>
>>          
>>
>>         On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Wayne Beaton
>>         <<mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>             We refocused. EclipseCon 2016 had more tracks than previous years and the programme
>>             committee certainly pumped up the desktop IDE content. This is a trend that I believe
>>             we'll continue.
>>
>>             I'll admit that there are subtleties in marketing that I don't understand. Harmful is
>>             in the eye of the beholder.
>>
>>          
>>
>>         I believe it was Ed who pointed out that there are people in the community, on the
>>         newcomers list, who were confused about the messaging, about whether they should be
>>         abandoning the Eclipse IDE for Che. I think we concluded at the meeting that that was harmful.
>>
>>          
>>
>>
>>
>>             Wayne
>>
>>              
>>
>>             On 15/03/16 12:47 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
>>
>>                 > Clearly, we have a perception problem.
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 Indeed
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 > I'm not convinced that the data supports your position: there was plenty
>>
>>                 > of content at EclipseCon focused on the desktop IDE and related projects.
>>
>>                 > Including two of my talks and at least one of the keynotes.
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 It’s not my position. I am conveying what I heard from the marketing department
>>                 when I asked why Oracle wasn’t sponsoring this year’s EclipseCon. At dev level, I
>>                 can tell you that many here have given up on submitting talk proposals because
>>                 talks focused on traditional desktop IDE areas have not been getting accepted in
>>                 the last few years.
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 > The "next generation" messaging is not coming from the Eclipse Foundation,
>>
>>                 > it's coming from the Che project. I understand that this distinction may be lost
>>
>>                 > on the greater community.
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 Are you saying that Eclipse Foundation is not able to exert influence over a
>>                 member project to stop this harmful messaging?
>>
>>                 Thanks,
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 - Konstantin
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 *From: *Wayne Beaton <mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>                 *Sent: *Tuesday, March 15, 2016 9:35 AM
>>                 *To: *Konstantin Komissarchik <mailto:konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>;
>>                 <mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>                 *Subject: *Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting?
>>
>>                  
>>
>>                 All of our efforts around FEEP are concerned with putting energy into the desktop
>>                 IDE. Moving Mikael into the development position is also concerned exclusively
>>                 with the desktop IDE. The Eclipse Foundation has never employed developers before.
>>                 Our first development effort contracts and hire are exclusively concerned with
>>                 addressing long standing issues with the desktop IDE. Clearly, we have a
>>                 perception problem.
>>
>>                 I'm not convinced that the data supports your position: there was plenty of
>>                 content at EclipseCon focused on the desktop IDE and related projects. Including
>>                 two of my talks and at least one of the keynotes.
>>
>>                 The "next generation" messaging is not coming from the Eclipse Foundation, it's
>>                 coming from the Che project. I understand that this distinction may be lost on the
>>                 greater community.
>>
>>                 Again, we have an opportunity with the press attention on Che to steal some of
>>                 that attention for the desktop IDE. What are we going to do about it?
>>
>>                 Wayne
>>
>>                 On 15/03/16 12:24 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
>>
>>                     I see Che’s messaging as a serious issue. To a lay person, the fact that this
>>                     message is coming from an Eclipse Foundation project lends it authority. Many
>>                     wouldn’t understand that this is just another project trying something new
>>                     rather than the official path forward endorsed by the community bringing them
>>                     the current Eclipse IDE.
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                     More broadly, it seems to me that Eclipse Foundation is focusing primarily on
>>                     new initiatives outside of desktop IDE space these days. Oracle’s marketing
>>                     department did not sponsor this past EclipseCon because the content has been
>>                     less and less relevant to desktop IDE space, which is our main reason for
>>                     involvement.
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                     Thanks,
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                     - Konstantin
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                     *From: *Wayne Beaton <mailto:wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>                     *Sent: *Tuesday, March 15, 2016 8:32 AM
>>                     *To:
>>                     *<mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>                     *Subject: *Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Next Meeting?
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                     Che is giving us some visibility. How do we leverage this? How do we encourage
>>                     people who are looking at Che to maybe give the desktop IDE a fresh look?
>>
>>                     Wayne
>>
>>                     On 15/03/16 05:12 AM, Eike Stepper wrote:
>>
>>                         Am 14.03.2016 um 21:03 schrieb Doug Schaefer:
>>
>>                             Oh, and our discussion on Che and the impact calling it the "Next
>>                             Generation Eclipse IDE" has on the existing IDE and community was
>>                             really good too :).
>>
>>
>>                         So can we do something to make the situation better for us?
>>
>>                         I googled
>>                         <https://www.google.de/search?q=%22Next+Generation+Eclipse+IDE%22&oq=%22Next+Generation+Eclipse+IDE%22&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8>https://www.google.de/search?q=%22Next+Generation+Eclipse+IDE%22&oq=%22Next+Generation+Eclipse+IDE%22&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8
>>                         and they seem to like this term a lot ;-(
>>
>>                         Cheers
>>                         /Eike
>>
>>                         ----
>>                         <http://www.esc-net.de>http://www.esc-net.de
>>                         <http://thegordian.blogspot.com>http://thegordian.blogspot.com
>>                         <http://twitter.com/eikestepper>http://twitter.com/eikestepper
>>
>>
>>                         _______________________________________________
>>                         eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
>>                         <mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>                         <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
>>
>>
>>                         IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to
>>                         the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you
>>                         must contact <mailto:emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
>>
>>                      
>>
>>                     -- 
>>                     Wayne Beaton
>>                     @waynebeaton
>>                     The Eclipse Foundation
>>
>>                       <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>                   <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>                 -- 
>>                 Wayne Beaton
>>                 @waynebeaton
>>                 The Eclipse Foundation
>>                 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>                   <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>                   <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>                 -- 
>>                 Wayne Beaton
>>                 @waynebeaton
>>                 The Eclipse Foundation
>>                 EclipseCon NA 2016<http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
>>             __ <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>_eclipse.org-architecture-council@eclipse.org_
>>             _https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council_
>>
>>             IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse
>>             Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact
>>             _emo@eclipse.org_ to request removal.
>>
>>           <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>           <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
>>         eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>         <mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>         https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
>>
>>         IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse
>>         Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>         <mailto:emo@xxxxxxxxxxx> to request removal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Jay Jay Billings
>>     Oak Ridge National Laboratory
>>     Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Jay Jay Billings
>> Oak Ridge National Laboratory
>> Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
>> eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
>>
>> IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
> 
> -- 
> Wayne Beaton
> @waynebeaton
> The Eclipse Foundation
> EclipseCon NA 2016 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/na2015>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
> eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
> 
> IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
> 

-- 

Dr. Maximilian Koegel

Senior Software Architect / General Manager
EclipseSource Munich

Email: mkoegel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: http://eclipsesource.com/munich
Mobil: +49 176 223 619 18
Phone: +49 89 21 555 30 - 10
Fax: +49 89 21 555 30 - 19
Skype: maximilian.koegel
Hangouts: mkoegel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

EclipseSource Muenchen GmbH
Agnes-Pockels-Bogen 1
80992 Muenchen

General Managers: Dr. Jonas Helming, Dr. Maximilian Koegel
Registered Office: Agnes-Pockels-Bogen 1, 80992 Muenchen,
Commercial Register Muenchen, HRB 191789

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Back to the top