On 2016-04-20 05:01 PM, Erwin de Ley
wrote:
Mike. An external repo or Market Place etc were indeed what we
were also thinking about.
On the other hand, I feel it's important to have an
as-simple-as-possible initial install experience, especially for
rather generic tools like a workflow IDE where we need to
"compete" with existing (non-eclipse) packages with a large set of
initially contained components and their dependencies.
Absolutely. But the converse also ends up being true: cramming too
much function and every possible dependency into the initial product
causes a different set of problems. The venerable Eclipse IDE lived
through all of these various decision points.
My recommendation to you is to think pretty hard about what is the
base platform, and the minimal set of useful functions to provide a
solid out of box experience. But then think about how to encourage
an ecosystem that adds value on top of that. You know things are
working well when groups you've never heard of start publishing
add-ons to your platform.
Also, if the Science WG or our projects end up needing to host own
"more-or-less-eclipsy" repository, wouldn't that be perceived as
being part of the eclipse ecosystem anyway?
There is a massive difference between what actually ships as part of
the Eclipse projects, and the ecosystem that grows up around them.
The Eclipse bits are expected to be IP clean. The ecosystem is
completely laissez faire. We do not vet anything.
Eclipse Marketplace is actually not a repository. It is a catalogue
that points to many repositories hosted elsewhere by others. We did
that precisely to provide the maximum amount of flexibility to the
ecosystem, while also providing an easy to find place and a great
install experience.
HTH.
|