Re: [linux-distros-dev] A bit of a reboot

[Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew Overholt wrote:
> Reasons for existence / Goals
> =============================
> We started the project after a few different distribution maintainers
> found that they were complaining about the same things (builds being
> difficult, lack of autotools support in CDT, package maintenance
> difficulties, etc.).  The goals at the time were two-fold:  1) be a
> place for distributions to collaborate and 2) provide tools specific to
> Linux developers and packagers.
>
>   

I think the reasons are more valid, and more reasonable as Eclipse 
grows. Though perhaps 1) and 2) don't converge as much as they should. 
I'm guilty of completely ignoring 1) in favour of 2). This is partly 
because people already do tasks associated with 1) regarding ChangeLog 
and I don't have too. I prefer to ignore it; guilty as charged ;) To be 
honest, I prefer updates sites to RPMs as it more the "Eclipse" way 
(imo). I wonder if these is a way to mesh them together?

> Current status
> ==============
> We have some Linux-specific tools that are doing well:  the ChangeLog
> plugin and the RPM specfile editor.  

I've had a lot of fun hacking on ChangeLog and this project has provided 
a good solid safe-haven from the  beginning. In that sense, and in my 
own eyes, this project has been a complete success.

> Unfortunately, little cross-distro collaboration has actually taken
> place.  I'd like to think this is because we all have lots to deal with
> in real life and in our respective distros.  What can do to improve
> here?  Since we all fight the same battles with builds and stuff, it
> would be good to work together and not duplicate effort.
>   

I've been periodically involved with Eclipse over several years, and 
packaging has evolved constantly throughout that time, but not in a 
consistent manner. That is not a criticism -  it is to be expected as it 
mirrors how Eclipse has grown. Eclipse has grown constantly but not 
consistently.

To be sure, distribution packaging  requires a lot of investment of time 
to do a "good enough" job, and a considerable investment of time do an 
excellent job. I think it is not something you can pick up for a few 
hours a week and do.  However, the work that has been going on in the 
last two years has moved what was a delicate, complicated and tricky job 
to a more consistent approach - at least in Linux. It is easy to be 
disillusioned, the improvements to process and tools are sometimes only 
apparent to those that work - or have worked on them.  But from a point 
of view as a code contributor, the folks working on 1) are doing a super 
job.  It takes a knowledge of history to know just how much better 
things are.

But you are right, now this work has been done, it's good to look at the 
cross-distribution collaboration issues.

> I think we need to do a few things:
>
> 1. Make an update site for the tools we have.
>   

Agreed. I still have my old one hosted where ChangeLog was originally 
developed:

http://people.redhat.com/pmuldoon/

If I remember correctly, it was all done via a wizard, and it wasn't too 
hard.  (on another note, I should take that site down ;)

> 2. Have an actual release!  Then we won't be the bad Eclipse project who
>    never really followed the processes :)
>   

A Linux tools based release separate from the distribution releases 
would be neat. Then we could follow a feature path instead of a Fedora 9 
or Ubuntu release path. The big drawback with distribution release paths 
is the functionality of the different Eclipse Linux Tools is not 
consistent across distributions.

> We need to have a plan in place soon so I'll be working on something
> more formal than this email.  I really welcome all feedback so please
> let me know whatever you're thinking -- even if it's "you're stupid" ;) .
>   

Thanks for asking, and starting the conversation!

Regards

Phil Muldoon