Jochen Krause wrote:
However, that would require running Java on our servers and the infrastructure team needs to step up for this (scalability tests beforehand are mandatory).
It's good this comes up now. We're in the process of provisioning the
new AMD servers that we got, so we definitely have the power to get
fancy. As soon as you have more (quantitative) details, such as hints
on RAM requirements or working prototypes, please let me know.
Jochen
---------------------
Jochen Krause
Innoopract
http://innoopract.com
-----Original Message-----
From: phoenix-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:phoenix-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wayne Beaton
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 7:46 PM
To: For developers on the new Eclipse.org website project.
Subject: Re: [phoenix-dev] Re: First steps towards a better eclipse.org website
It should be relatively easy to make a customized p2-based installer that lets the user pick a configuration (with fancy graphics). We can probably even ask the user if they want to participate in the UDC as part of an installer as well.
Wayne
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 09:18 -0700, Ian Bull wrote:
There is a recent discussion of the installer on the Eclipse-dev list,
and I was thinking maybe we can use p2 to help with the complexity of
our website. This thread started because: "there are 10's of projects
and 100's of download options at eclipse".
I wonder if a standard installer can help here. I know the current
installer is just meant to get a particular version of the Eclipse
SDK, but now with p2, it should be possible to have a 1 download
solution for everything at Eclipse.
The download would be an installer, configured with a "standard tab"
and "advanced tab". The standard tab would have the different EPP versions:
1 big button to get C/C++, J2EE, Modeling, Run-Time, etc... On the
"advanced tab", a user can pick and choose the exact packages they
want (and p2 can sort out the dependencies).
I am posting this here (instead of eclipse-dev) as I don't want to
derail the discussion around the shape of 3.4, and this is *not*
something to consider for 3.4. But in the long term, if we re-think
the way we ship Eclipse it may make our website easier to navigate.
Just an idea.
Ian
Bjorn Freeman-Benson wrote:
Ian,
First, I just wanted to have parallel wording between the "users"
and "adopters" - I (personally) think we don't give adopters enough
credit at Eclipse. Hence my desire to see a parallel construct.
Second, there's a different between "an information source" and
"make it easy". Make it easy implies a more proactive approach: we
could provide tools for projects that help the projects make it
easier for adopters (e.g. a way for adopters to register the APIs
that they use so that the projects know which are the most important
APIs), things that aren't just "information"... Anyway, that's my thought.
- Bjorn
I was thinking my second bullet would cover this point. The goal
being to be an information source for anyone to use and adopt Eclipse
technology. Or do you think it is sufficiently different to make
them separate?
--
[end of message]
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
*MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is believed to be
clean.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----
_______________________________________________
phoenix-dev mailing list
phoenix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/phoenix-dev
--
R. Ian Bull
PhD Candidate, University of Victoria
http://www.ianbull.com
http://irbull.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
phoenix-dev mailing list
phoenix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/phoenix-dev
_______________________________________________
phoenix-dev mailing list
phoenix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/phoenix-dev
--
Denis Roy
Manager, IT Infrastructure
Eclipse Foundation, Inc. -- http://www.eclipse.org/
Office: 613.224.9461 x224 (Eastern time)
Cell: 819.210.6481
denis.roy@xxxxxxxxxxx
|
