"CARASSO Felipe" <Felipe.CARASSO@gemalto.com> wrote on 10/16/2006 04:46:12
PM:
> > From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markp@softlanding.com]
> >
> > Because I think that the Eclipse CVS developers care about
> > usability and have a lot of users using their tool and thus
> > get a lot of feedback. My primary contention here is that,
> > from a usability point of view, cramming several options that
> > are all slight variants of each other on to the same menu
> > does not make the product better or easier to use. The fact
> > that the CVS developers also do not have this option confirms
> > (for me at least) that my feelings might be shared by others.
> >
> > Whether Subversion aims to be better than CVS has nothing to
> > do with a simple UI discussion.
>
> Could that be read as "Subclipse will never have more options
> than CVS plugin"?
>
> If not, never forgetting that you're the decision taker thus
> have all the right to decide whatever you want about Subclipse, could
> you roughly explain what would be the criteria for an option to be
> judged worth of being on Subclipse and not on CVS?
We already have many options that CVS does not have, and would certainly
expect to since SVN has options that CVS does not have. But we also have
many features, such as bug tracking integration that CVS does not have. We
are not trying to limit ourselves based on CVS, but we certainly try to
learn from them. Also, since we have proposed moving Subclipse to
Eclipse, I do see benefit in presenting a consistent UI between the
plugins. There is currently a common History view, I'd like to see a
common Repository view added eventually. Some of our dialogs are at least
similar if not identical.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 16 22:55:38 2006