Re: [nebula-dev] Future of Nebula

[Wim Jongman <wim.jongman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Hallvard,

Thanks for joining the discussion.

On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Hallvard Trætteberg <hal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

Sorry my comments are a bit late (Easter holiday/Spring break).

>From the consumer perspective, I agree that a table summarizing the purpose, features and state of widgets is important. I think a table with the following contents would be a good start:

- widget name
- one-liner describing purpose
- SWT support (yes/no)
- RWT/RAP support (yes/no)
- JFace requirement (yes/optional/no)
- CSS support, i.e. can be styled with CSS
- lead maintainer
- (separate) indication of maturity (e.g. alpha, beta, released, mature) and activity (e.g. inactive (dead?), stable (mainly bug-fixing), active (new features in development))
- links to example page, bugzilla, source repo, ...

Yes, there seems to be consensus about this. I will start this effort.

 

>From the maintainer perspective I think it is important to allow for several models, from simple widget in common repo and little or no overhead, to separate project with own repo, releases and site. This ensures a low threshold for contributing, while allowing more complex projects to manage on their own without burdening the Nebula lead.

I agree. This is more or less like we do it now. Edwin?