Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] AC 13-Oct Meeting Minutes
Ultimate at the moment is around 700MB. Xcode and Visual Studio are in the Gig’s and that’s the comparable I’m targeting.

And ultimately (sorry for the pun :) ), this is about testing UX when the most common plug-ins are all installed at once, again, just as Xcode and Visual Studio are constructed.

For lightweight solutions, I’m keeping a close eye on Visual Studio Code. We already have Eclipse groups working with them on integrations. That might be a way forward.

Doug.

From: <eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of "Billings, Jay Jay" <billingsjj@xxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Eclipse Architecture Council <eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, October 14, 2016 at 7:42 AM
To: Eclipse Architecture Council <eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] AC 13-Oct Meeting Minutes

Thanks for sending this! Here are some random thoughts. Apologies again for missing the call!


I was looking at the Eclipse Ultimate discussion. As a point of reference, until recently, our guideline for ICE was "add any feature that would be useful to a scientist and is IP approved." It ballooned to about 1.2G, and we had to cull the list once complaints started rolling in. It ended up being an all around bad experience for us, so now we have a much smaller build at 511MB and are trying to go smaller.


Something I also wanted to mention along the UX line is that I've been playing with the Atom editor (http://atom.io) lately. It is, in my opinion, a very good example of how lightweight a code editor could (some would say should) be and it roughly lines up with what I was pitching for a "lightweight Eclipse build" in our post-ECNA discussion thread.


Jay


Jay Jay Billings
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Twitter Handle: @jayjaybillings
From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Oberhuber, Martin <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 12:24 PM
To: eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] AC 13-Oct Meeting Minutes
 

Hi all,

 

Notes of the meeting we just had are now online:

https://wiki.eclipse.org/Architecture_Council/Meetings/October_13_2016

 

Actions for Wayne, Eike and myself.

 

I’d like to mention that we had good attendance (14), but from the official PMC reps we only got 5 out of 12. We can discuss next month whether that’s an issue or not … but perhaps the not attending PMCs could consider nominating people who would be willing to join ? Today BIRT, DTP, Mylyn, RT, SOA, WTP and LocationTech were not officially represented. Maybe not an issue, but I did want to point it out.

 

Thanks,

Martin

--

Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Owner – Development Tools, Wind River

direct +43.662.457915.85  fax +43.662.457915.6

 

Back to the top