[news.eclipse.tools.pdt] Re: PDT and Galileo

[Nick Boldt <codeslave@xxxxxxxxxx>]

"I understand why this is considered one of the benefits of the 
simultaneous release, however, the PDT project was unable to commit to 
the Ganymede time line (due to various reasons I would rather not go 
into here)." - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=238960#c2

"From an internal perspective, whoever knows the PDT community which 
built a great community of PHP users that have zero knowledge in 
Java/Eclipse, understands that keeping Eclipse PDT with Ganymede is a 
"mission impossible" task as we have many dependencies that we should 
follow and sync." - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=238960#c10

I've no idea why PDT 2.1 can't be part of Galileo. In the interest of 
transparency, perhaps their dev team can provide some insights?

--
Nick Boldt :: http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/User:Nickb

Tim Anderson wrote:
> "Nick Boldt" <codeslave@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
> news:48F19EA6.2020601@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > The only remaining blocker is that of scheduling, and that one's 
> > political, not technical, AFAICT.
>
> Nick,
>
> Can you explain - who is opposed to scheduling PDT to be part of Galileo?
>
> Thanks
>
> Tim