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

Edward Mann wrote:
>> 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.
> 

Edwardo,

That is indeed what I'm suggesting.

Mike.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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