[News.eclipse.foundation] Re: E4 / SWT 4.0

[Eric Rizzo <eclipse-news@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Note: I've copied this thread over to eclipse.foundation because I think 
it has broader scope than just SWT.
(my own comments below)

Ed Merks wrote:
> > 2) the vision for the next releases
> There will still be 3.x releases.  The plans for those aren't out
> yet.  Without community involvement, those plans will most likely be
> driven by the  priorities of choice for the people making the plans.

There's been a lot I've wanted to comment on in this thread, but this 
above is the crux of the problem: as a community member (as opposed to a 
committer), it is practically impossible to be "involved" in the 
planning beyond just entering, commenting on, and voting for Bugilla 
reports. That is the only tool we really have, and yet (as Laurent has 
pointed out and others have surely noticed) many, many issues in 
Bugzilla are either rejected from the outset (some with, and some 
without, cause) or simply wither on the vine from lack of attention. 
This includes both bugs and enhancements. Ed, your particular example of 
EMF defects, while admirable, is not the standard across the other 
top-level projects; EMF is an anomaly, in my experience, in this area.

So, if our only tool to be involved in planning is a victim of the 
priorities of those doing the planning, how are we to "get involved" in 
the planning when our priorities differ from the decision makers.
The barrier to entry is indeed way to high and, again as Laurent has 
been saying, most of us do not work for a company that is willing to pay 
us to put in the amount of time it actually takes to get respected 
status and hold the ear of the project teams. Volunteer time for someone 
who spends his working hours neck-high in Eclipse is *significantly* 
easier than for someone who only uses Eclipse projects most of the time 
and want to try to contribute in his spare time. I think that fact is 
often overlooked by the existing contributors. The barrier to entry and 
learning curves are very, very high; those of you whose employment has 
paid that cost have a big advantage over those who have to shoulder it 
on their own.

Eclipse committers can say all they want that it is possible for an 
outsider to join the team with enough contribution, but that is like 
saying it is possible for "anyone" to become president (or prime 
minister) - yes, its technically possible but it is not practical. 
Again, the barrier to entry is just so high. Now, before someone throws 
a straw man into the discussion, let me be clear that of course I am not 
advocating opening the doors and letting anyone and everyone commit 
code. But for the comitter to repeatedly say "get involved" in response 
to interrogation or critic, well that just trivializes what that really 
takes to get involved beyond just contributing ideas and bug reports. To 
be honest, it is a little insulting to those of us who *do* contribute a 
lot that is not in the form of code. Trust me, I've experienced the 
glass wall many times, despite my prominent position in the community. 
The bottom line: there is a bit of a perceived glass wall between the 
community and the project teams, and until that is recognized by the 
teams (instead of denying or defending it without reflecting upon it) 
there will continue to be this "us and them" mentality from this side of 
that wall.
Look, I don't think anyone here is being malicious or ungrateful or 
anything like that - I think we are just trying to be honest.
Most of us in the community greatly respect the work that the Eclipse 
project teams do and greatly appreciate the products that they produce. 
But there *are* problems in the system and if we can't have open, honest 
discussion about them, we might as well all go somewhere else because 
without that openness and honesty, Eclipse will be doomed to failure.

Eric