Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | add Subversion to Scout package | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Technology] EPP | Reporter: | Markus Knauer <mknauer> |
| Component: | scout-package | Assignee: | Project Inbox <epp.packager-inbox> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | enhancement | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | Andreas.Hoegger, holger.staudacher, judith.gull, wayne.beaton, zimmermann |
| Version: | 1.4.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | 1.4.0 | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 350232 | ||
|
Description
Markus Knauer
Subversive SVN Team Provider is marked incubation. Would the package need to be renamed to "Eclipse for Scout Developers (includes Incubating components)", if subversive is included? (In reply to comment #0) > Since the source code of Scout is located in the eclipse.org subversion > repository, it may make sense to include the subversion client into this > package in the future. I don't necessarily agree. Whether or not this is true depends on the needs of the community that downloads and uses the Scout package. The Scout project is probably the best judge of that.(In reply to comment #1) > Subversive SVN Team Provider is marked incubation. > > Would the package need to be renamed to "Eclipse for Scout Developers (includes > Incubating components)", if subversive is included? Yes. However, Subversive is planning to graduate with Juno. So the question is probably moot. Most people on the project aggree that subversive should NOT be included, because of the following reasons: - it is not necessary to use svn at all when using scout - when starting the package, the connector has to be selected. This is annoying when not used - some people prefer subversive - there is one more dependency to a project building with +2 Thanks, fine with me, I understand your reasons. Then this one looks like a WONTFIX. I'll close this bug for now. |