Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Feedback on the europa update site

[jograham@xxxxxxxxxx]

>  - DTP is just overkill for an end user. Could not we have just two
entries, general Data tools and SQL based data tools, and put all the
enablement features in a sub category? <

I can see Pascal's point here, and I'd like to group the DTP features into
two wrappers, like we talked about at the beginning of Europa: end-user and
extender. Before doing so, however, I'd just like to confirm that this
grouping (which would mean having only two features in features-dtp.xml for
Europa, but wrapping/including the current complete set) would still allow
other projects, such as BIRT, that depend on specific included features to
access them in the same way as they do now. (For instance, if someone
selects BIRT features that require parts of DTP, then "select required"
will find still find the features).

Regards,
John Graham
Eclipse Data Tools Platform PMC Chair
Staff Software Engineer, Sybase, Inc.
http://dataplat.blogspot.com/



                                                                           
             Pascal Rapicault                                              
             <Pascal_Rapicault                                             
             @ca.ibm.com>                                               To 
             Sent by:                  cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxx 
             cross-project-iss         g                                   
             ues-dev-bounces@e                                          cc 
             clipse.org                                                    
                                                                   Subject 
                                       [cross-project-issues-dev] Feedback 
             05/28/2007 10:55          on the europa update site           
             PM                                                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
             Please respond to                                             
               Cross project                                               
                  issues                                                   
             <cross-project-is                                             
             sues-dev@eclipse.                                             
                   org>                                                    
                                                                           
                                                                           





Hi,

Starting from a platform binary download, I decided to see what I could get
from Europa.
Overall I was pretty amazed by the amount of stuffs that I could get but
still a bit disappointed to see that Subversive and PDT were missing. Too
bad we can't force people in the train :-)

I have noticed a bunch of weirdness for which I have / will open bug
reports against various components. But here are a few general points:

- I found pieces that I was not expecting, did the rules changed for
      - SDKs for the following components DLTK Core SDK (in the
enablement), Corona client and servers, EMF, SDO, JET, EODM, OCL, UML2,
DTP, DLTK Ruby, DLTK Tcl, Remote system explorer extender S
      - Examples:  ECF

- A lot of features had a lot of cryptic names, not easing the readability
of the list, for example:
      - EODM
      - Dynamic Languages Toolking (DLKT) Ruby
      - IPExact Editor and Checker
      - TPTP Tracing and Profiling Tools project (in fact all the TPTP
features say TPTP in the name)

- The categorization of features could be improved
      - Could / should DALI be moved to the Java Development, what about
some
      - Some features of "Remote Access and Device Development" could be
moved under C/C++
      - Should CVS be moved under the "Collaboration" category?

- Description (blob of text under the features list) and number of features
not user friendly. Some components just have too many features presented to
the end user:
      - DTP is just overkill for an end user. Could not we have just two
entries, general Data tools and SQL based data tools, and put all the
enablement features in a sub category?
      - Corona, do we really want to make the server installable from here?
what would one do with a server installed in such a way?
      - Remote system explorer, same problem than DTP.
      - Overall the descriptions should be reviewed to help the user makes
a choice whether or not he/she needs this functionality. If no good
description can be found, then the feature should probably move into the
"enablement feature" category :-) Also we should probably using the word
"feature" in the description.

HTH,

PaScaL

_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev