Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2

> The real problem is "the platform team" vanishes :((. Unless the 
> broad community steps in to strengthen it we are done.

The platform team isn't going to vanish unless Eclipse vanishes. There may
not be demand for a large group of platform contributors because the
foundation is good enough and now it's time to build the chimney. 

To try to get back on topic... The Planning Council is responsible for
establishing the simultaneous release and resolving cross-project issues
that arise. The topic of whether Juno should be 3.8 or 4.2 based (or both)
was on the agenda for many meetings last year. Perhaps this should be on the
agenda again for the next meeting?

http://wiki.eclipse.org/Planning_Council

- Konstantin
 

-----Original Message-----
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Aleksandar Kurtakov
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 4:17 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2


----- Original Message -----
> From: "Konstantin Komissarchik" <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Cross project issues" <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:13:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2
> 
> > "The one that does the job decides!"
> 
> Indeed, but the rest of that quote is "and accepts consequences for 
> those decisions".
> 
> I do not believe that the broad community is disinterested in helping 
> 4.x in reaching maturity. This thread and others like it are simply a 
> call to slow down and to do this more safely. It would not be wise for 
> the platform team to disregard these calls.

The real problem is "the platform team" vanishes :((. Unless the broad
community steps in to strengthen it we are done.

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

> 
> - Konstantin
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Aleksandar Kurtakov
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 4:02 AM
> To: Cross project issues
> Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Stephan Herrmann" <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2012 1:40:02 PM
> > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Performance, 3.8 versus 4.2
> > 
> > On 09/06/2012 08:23 AM, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> > > Introducing a new platform undoubtedly consumes a lot of 
> > > resources.
> > > Doing that anyway (and as the only viable alternative), well aware 
> > > that those resources were scarce and that the new platform had 
> > > inferior performance, and then blame the community for not 
> > > helping, that doesn't fly well with me.
> > 
> > Maybe the problem is, "the community" isn't quite as homogeneous as 
> > we keep thinking. 3.8 vs. 4.2 is a conflict of interests between 
> > different groups of people.
> > 
> > If you are part of the group that only sees regressions not a single 
> > improvement in 4.2, it's difficult to get motivated helping those 
> > other guys getting their baby up to speed. Of course those who 
> > greatly benefit from the new architecture don't want to get slowed 
> > down by "legacy" decisions.
> > 
> > Lets call one group the IDE nerds and the other group the e4-RCP 
> > folks.
> > As a thought experiment: are the e4-RCP folks strong enough in 
> > resources to make 4.3 a replacement that will not get into faces of 
> > the IDE nerds?
> 
> What about e4-RCP folks outnumber the IDE nerds significantly (amongst 
> active contributors) so it's there call.
> "The one that does the job decides!"
> 
> Alexander Kurtakov
> Red Hat Eclipse team
> 
> 
> > 
> > I don't know the answer, but I feel the answer differs depending on 
> > whether you focus on functionality, bugs, performance or usability.
> > 
> > Yes, we are still one community, and I'm not advocating fences and 
> > boundaries, but helping each other seems to work best when cost and 
> > benefits are equally balanced in all regions of this community.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 09/06/2012 07:06 AM, Pascal Rapicault wrote:
> >  > But more importantly than all this is the meta conclusion that  > 
> > the
> > > era of being able to take the platform for granted is over and  >
> > that  > we are all going to have to pay more attention to it, roll 
> > up our  > sleeves and contribute.
> > 
> > I'd like to second this. No part of the entire ecosystem can be 
> > taken for granted, not the platform, not jdt, not p2, nor the team 
> > providers.
> > All components need continued care and everybody needs help (no 
> > sarcasm intended, in case anyone wonders).
> > 
> > cheers,
> > Stephan
> > 
> > PS: Great to see efforts to bring performance tests back! Thanks!
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list 
> > cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
> 
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev



Back to the top