-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
You know, I agree with Panagiotis in spirit- it would be swell if the
two projects could merge. In practice though, I'm a little sad that
subversive didn't just contribute to subclipse vs. starting a new
project. I'm sure that the code is organized better when you do a
ground-up re-write, it just would have been nice -and logical-, to
refactor/whatnot subclipse. Subclipse is freaking SUPER active, great
people, etc..
Did subversive/polarion(sp?) come to the subclipse community with a
proposal I missed, prior to beginning development?
Also of concern is the fact that subversive appears to be a company,
vs. a community- I haven't any type of feel for the community around
subversive, and don't know what it's current state is- so I could be
wrong, and it could be supported more by the community now, than the
company- always what you want in an opensource project, if you ask me
(just out of concern of a "single point" failure).
I guess one of the things I'm interested in, if anyone knows (I'll goog
around a bit in the future), is the state of the subversive community.
Is there anyone on-list working on both projects? Panagiotis?
If there is a thriving and growing community for subversive, it may be
with trying to team up.
On the other hand, it's nice to have options, and competition can be
healthy.
I would think that anyone with a lick of sense however, would rather
that subclipse be bundled with eclipse vs. subversive.
Subclipse is a more mature project, and has good relations with subversion.
I think it's good that we're getting this proposal together, but I
disagree with the mentality that it's a race for inclusion in Eclipse.
Just look at the Eclipse<>Subclipse thread.
Now that sourceforge and others are offering SVN, I see why "Eclipse" is
interested in getting a bundled "client", as it makes sense (Second most
requested?).
It doesn't make sense to run with a group without a real track record,
however, no matter how fast they get a proposal out the door. I just
don't think it should work that way. Sponsorship by a company alone
does not a successful-open-source-project make.
But that's neither here nor there, really- and to tell the truth, I
could care less about Eclipse inclusion. It would be nice, but as Mark
or someone noted, Subversion itself is a "living" entity, and thus
changing. I'd like the emphasis to be on subversion, vs. Eclipse,
personally. Just random opinion, and not held super firm or whatever...
It is startling that a project written from the ground, up, and
targeting only javaSVN, would be less stable than subclipse, with it's
battle scars and all.
Again, just going by what I've read/googled so far- haven't tried
subversive, so I'm as bad as anyone, spreading 2nd hand knowledge. For
shame!
Heh. What an interesting world, neh? Silly too.
Anyway, that's my take on the competing projects topic, apologies if my
lack of knowledge/background makes these comments silly.
:Den
PS hey Mark, if you're not off already, have a lovely vacation man!!
Mark Phippard wrote:
> Why does it seem that every post that says Subversive seems better than
> Subclipse, also says that they have either never used either, or barely
> used them?
>
> http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/t76188.rhtml
>
> Just an fyi, but I will be mostly offline until Monday.
>
> Thanks
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEtY6C/xFjPvtodwARAqZDAJ9XnQiECbmkWMLwK2y6VOk0dXglvACgh6Nw
ySpdi7nktPspdlDsE+i6uak=
=7XQo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jul 13 02:06:42 2006