The name is baked into Bylaws. Changing it is hard. During the
last revision, we made sure that providing actual architectural
oversight was in the list of responsibilities. I believe that the
name is still apt. Further, I believe that the notion of
subcommittees puts us more on track to actually provide real
architectural oversight and advice.
The Che and Dirigible projects aren't going to join the ide-dev
list if they have to filter through unrelated discussion topics.
Frankly, I'm thinking of this as a big opportunity for the AC to
provide real value to the community. The problem that I'm hoping
to solve is to make sure that we have a coherent story around LSP.
With our cross-project visibility, I think that the AC is uniquely
positioned to provide that. Early successes are great, but
sustained success requires continued focus and leadership.
HTH,
Wayne
On 10/11/16 12:51 PM, Mickael Istria
wrote:
On 11/10/2016 06:32 PM, Wayne Beaton
wrote:
I propose that we refocus our monthly "all hands" calls to focus
specifically on the responsibilities outlined in the Bylaws. We
should, for example, highlight issues of concern for projects
with regard to process and discuss alternatives. I'd really
like, for example, to find some resolution on how we revise the
EDP to let fast moving new projects release very frequently.
So it's not really going to be about architecture then I think
it's also worth renaming the Architecture Council by the way to
something like "Projects support Council".
As we also discussed on the call today, I think that
we should stand up a new subcommittee to guide our efforts
around the Language Server Protocol. We have several existing
projects that are focused on this and have added several new
projects. We have an excellent opportunity to provide guidance
and coordination for these projects. The following projects come
immediately to mind: Xtext, Che, JDT LS, LSP4J, and LSP4e (did I
miss anybody?)
I believe Dirigible is currently "watching" the LSP, not sure if
it's going to actually jump in the train soon.
Who is interested in providing some leadership in this
subcommittee? The first step is decide among yourselves who
will take the lead, then connect with the webmaster to
provision the required resources, and update the
''Subcommittees'' section on the AC Landing page. Let me know
how I can help.
Does the LSP integrations need a leadership? There was no
"leadership" in the last 6 months, and yet it's been pretty
successful and have brought several projects to Eclipse.org that
have managed to coordinate properly. What is the problem we're
trying to solve with a committee?
As LSP is pretty related to IDE, and most if not all people
involved in LSP are on the ide-dev mailing-list, why not just
using this mailing-list for cross-LSP-projects discussions?
Cheers,
_______________________________________________
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
|