| Re: [ide-dev] An "IDE Working Group" |
|
That last sentence wasn't a sentence. Did you mean "If we find"? Or "We did find"?
That's true about working groups though. Of the working groups that mentioned CDT in their mandate, I haven't seem any direct contribution from them. Unless they started by fixing platform issues.
From: Ian Skerrett <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Eclipse Foundation Reply-To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Monday, 23 September, 2013 1:46 PM To: 'Discussions about the IDE' <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [ide-dev] An "IDE Working Group" A working group might be how companies can participate that don’t want to provide developers/committers. We find a group of companies that are willing
to spend $50K/each to fund some developers to work on JDT. From:
ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer Well, to be fair, a lot of companies are already contributing resources to make the IDE better but at the project level. It just hasn't been co-ordinated
between projects for the greater good. From:
Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> Mickael, I tend to agree. Working groups are exactly the mechanism created for this purpose. ?It's the obvious way forward in my
mind. Of course, a working group would actually require some companies to put their {time+resources+money} where their mouth
is. And that is where all previous attempts to make progress on this topic have faltered.
Mike Milinkovich
Since it didn't led to many reactions, here is why I think an IDE Working Group makes sense to improve the IDE parts of Eclipse. --
|