[cross-project-issues-dev] Removing aCute from SimRel

[Mickael Istria]

Hi all,

I'd like to remove Eclipse aCute from Simultaneous Release.

While being included in SimRel requires some efforts and puts extra
pressure, we do not see any clear ROI for aCute at the moment compared to
what's possible without SimRel, both for end-users (basically Marketplace
is enough for aCute as we are not likely to produce an EPP package at the
moment) or for maintainers (aCute already manages to intergate well with
upstream projects without being in SimRel).
This may change in the future, if C# becomes more successful or if C#
developers like to move to other non-Micosoft IDEs, but it's not really the
trend we see and current contributors cannot (and even want to?) change
that just with aCute.

If anyone wants to step in and take care of inclusion in SimRel, of
creation of EPP packages for C#/.NET Core, or whatever in favor of making
the project more widely used, they would for sure be welcome; so feel free
to speak up!

Cheers

[Mickael Istria]

By the way, I'd like to use this as an opportunity to remind that
(according to our experience with Corrosion/Rust EPP) some EPP packages
really fail at reaching their full audience because of
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=506244 . I can't wait to read
some news from the Board or EMO about it...
Basically, https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=506244 is also
involved in the removal of aCute from SimRel: if including a JRE in EPP
were approved (like it seems to be for Docker-based deliveries), then we
may have seen more interest in aCute shipped as EPP and aCute would have
been forced to remain in SimRel.

[Ed Merks]

Mickael,

Your hard working committer reps (Dani and I) are actively involved in
the discussions around being able to ship a bundled JRE along with
select EPP's packages and in Oomph's installer.

You can follow the details in the minutes:

  https://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/minutes.php

In particular, in June this was approved:

https://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/boardminutes/2018_06_11-12_Minutes.pdf

But as the notes suggest, the vote was subsequently voided due to lack
of notice on the topic prior to the June meeting, with more details
about that in July:

https://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/boardminutes/2018_07_18_Minutes.pdf

Since July, it was further discussed in the IP Advisory committee (which
I attend, though not as regularly as I should; lots of discussions
around spec processes for Jakarata enablement among lots of lawyers) and
at the face-to-face October board meeting; those those minutes are not
linked yet.

You can see the players involved and you can imagine that behind those
players are large legal organizations that tend to move slowly and to be
highly conservative. I feel the trend is now in the right direction
again to get this on track eventually...  But I wouldn't start holding
my breath just yet!

Regards,
Ed

Post by Mickael Istria
By the way, I'd like to use this as an opportunity to remind that
(according to our experience with Corrosion/Rust EPP) some EPP
packages really fail at reaching their full audience because of
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=506244 . I can't wait to
read some news from the Board or EMO about it...
Basically, https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=506244 is
also involved in the removal of aCute from SimRel: if including a JRE
in EPP were approved (like it seems to be for Docker-based
deliveries), then we may have seen more interest in aCute shipped as
EPP and aCute would have been forced to remain in SimRel.
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev