Re: Last Straw... I have had it!

> Edward Mann wrote:
>> Ok,
>>
>> So i have had it with this 3.2 fragment issue. I have tried to get it to
>> build, but my working environment is to new and is causing more issues
>> for me working on 3.2. I have a version in Nightly that works. My idea
>> is to keep it, make a update site for 3.2 and say if you want support
>> move to 3.3. I have issues with 3.4 that i would like to work on, and i
>> want to get things cleaned up for 3.4.
>>
>> So if someone else wants to take the 3.2 issue and work on it i will
>> help where i can, it's mostly working, but it needs more attention,
>> right now it will load the compatibility patch for everyone. I tried a
>> workaround, but that only ended up in breaking the build. So i am
>> throwing in the towel. I don't see it worth my time to get PHPEclipse
>> 1.2.0 working on a very old version of Eclipse.
>>
>> Also as it seems only two people tend to answer these posts, Mbowie, we
>> will have an arm wrestling match and the winner get's to decide if we
>> push 1.2.0 out with 3.3 support only.  The 1.2.0 series will support
>> Eclipse 3.3. The 1.3.0 will support 3.4, and if we can get stuff done
>> quicker than the 1.2.0 release, we will work on making 1.4.0 work with
>> Eclipse 3.5 and have it out close to the time they do the next major
>> release of Eclipse. Then maybe for the 3.6 release of Eclipse we can get
>> in on the "all plug-ins release at same time" fun.
>>
>>>From talking with someone (zx) in the Eclipse channel we should target a
>> release of PHPEclipse per Eclipse release. Because some items that we
>> depend upon in a new release of PHPEclipse may not be in an older
>> release of Eclipse. And like i said before we are not a large team, so
>> we cannot branch and have people support different versions. But then
>> again if someone wants to step forward and do that i am all for it. But
>> your not volunteering me for the job. I don't mind fixing bugs, but it's
>> gotta be worth fixing for me.
>>
>
> Good day folks,
>
> I think the victory here is being overshadowed by somewhat of a minor
> issue... the fact is that a rather annoying compatibility issue, (which,
> IMHO was partially introduced upstream,) has been resolved!  Big
> high-fives all round for Mr Mann, as he's done a great job working it
> out amongst all his other "real world" commitments.
>
> I'd like to suggest that we roll a final 1.1.x build with the fragment
> included, then push 1.2.0 without it.  In an ideal world, I'd like to
> see the project continue to support 3.2, but I do agree that moving
> forward is a more pressing need.  I'd imagine that the nightly is going
> to go through some pretty radical "changes" in the few months following
> 1.2.0, so hopefully we'll see the majority of users using the stable
> build.
>
> I would like to keep the 3.2 fragment and any notes related to it handy
> though... while I appreciate what people are saying about 3.2 being old,
> from what we see in IRC, it is a widely used build; and there are users
> who are quite happy with 3.2.  I personally think it's a case of the
> "tail wagging to dog" for a plugin to force you to update your
> environment... that sounds like something a business driven model would
> do.  I also understand the point that the Eclipse project deems 3.2 to
> be "old news", but if PHPEclipse's visions were parallel to that of the
> Eclipse Foundation, we'd all have joined the PDT project long ago.
>
> So let's not overlook the fact that we have a solution which we can
> "roll by hand" for the time being; and if we continue to see this as an
> issue as we approach future milestones, maybe it can be re-addressed
> then.  I'd be happy to pickup Mr Mann's efforts at some point, should
> the need arise.
>
> Perhaps we could consider adding an "opt-in" anonymous usage statistics
> feature... something which reported a handful of platform and version
> number details on startup.  In future, that would give us *some* idea of
> the builds in the wild and the platforms actively in use.  Although, I
> think said feature would be even better in the Eclipse core.
>
> I think this is awesome progress... great work Mr Mann!
>
> Mike.
>

Mike,

If i am reading you correct, this is what i am going to do.

I am going to make a 1.1.9 release of PHPEclipse that has the fragment
installed. Users with Eclipse 3.2 will need to use this release.

Then i am going to make another release for Eclipse 3.3 for 1.2.0. This
will be a build right from trunk without the fragment. And users of
Eclipse 3.3 will use this build.

We would only be doing fixes in trunk, and testing on 3.3 of Eclipse. The
Hudson build for 1.2.0 will move to the Eclipse 3.3 SDK. I have been
building with 3.2... i believe.

Anything missing?

Thanks for the responses everyone. Now i don't feel like the lone voice
shouting into the darkens.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW!
Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project,
along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness
and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08