Community
Participate
Working Groups
After some soul searching and discussion with others in WTP, I think it best we "cancel" the JavaScript IDE package for Juno. While it is quite a few downloads (5th of 12, at the moment, in list of Indigo packages) is does not seem to be wildly popular and, so far, there seems to be no one else interested in maintaining the package. Of course, if someone _is_ interested, feel free to say so and we can discuss. But, thought I would open this bug, for that discussion, as well as discussion of any "mechanics" that need to occur to stop building the package for Juno. I'm assuming that Markus just needs to remove a few lines from some master script/feature (I have not looked, my self, but probably have access to that master file, so happy to take a closer look later). I will, if no one comes forward, continue to maintain the Indigo maintenance packages, as that only seems fair to provide continuity, but for Juno, I propose we not deliver it in M2, so it will be clear there are no plans to provide it next year (again, unless someone comes forward before then). = = = = = = = = = Eclipse IDE for Java EE Developers, Downloaded 1,283,176 Eclipse Classic 3.7, Downloaded 1,044,449 Eclipse IDE for Java Developers, Downloaded 373,213 Eclipse IDE for C/C++ Developers, Downloaded 185,116 Eclipse IDE for JavaScript Web Developers, Downloaded 74,895 Eclipse IDE for Java and Report Developers, Downloaded 46,414 Eclipse IDE for C/C++ Linux Developers Downloaded 43,785 Eclipse Modeling Tools, Downloaded 27,929 Eclipse for RCP and RAP Developers, Downloaded 21,016 Eclipse for Testers, Downloaded 13,310 Eclipse IDE for Parallel Application Developers Downloaded 3,992 Eclipse for Scout Developers, Downloaded 3,908
I think it is fine to cancel the JavaScript package for Juno. I especially appreciate you continuing to maintain the package for Indigo. I think dropping packages for the SR1 and SR2 would be a very bad example. FWIW, most project/people would die for 70K downloads over a period of 2 months. :-)
* dependency in "allpackages" feature removed * packages_map.txt entry updated * package build disabled (Others would be happy if they had so many downloads... ;-) Many thanks for making this package so popular!)
Personally this package of plugins has provided the best base for me when working on web development work, so I will be sorry to miss it ... but perhaps the problem is not so much building packages of plugins, but providing an easy way to 'clone' a configuration of packages without all the agro of finding each one? Being able to dump a list of the plugins I have loaded so I can load the same setup on another machine, or new version?
(In reply to comment #3) > Being able to dump a list of the plugins I have loaded so I can load the > same setup on another machine, or new version? Maybe 'File' > 'Export...' > 'Install' > 'Installed Software Items to File' is what you are looking for. This wizard enables you to create a dump of your installed software items (or a subset of it) into a file.
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Being able to dump a list of the plugins I have loaded so I can load the > > same setup on another machine, or new version? > > Maybe 'File' > 'Export...' > 'Install' > 'Installed Software Items to File' is > what you are looking for. This wizard enables you to create a dump of your > installed software items (or a subset of it) into a file. Except that it does not list the plugins included IN the javascript package. What I was suggesting is that rather than creating a bundle, it would be nice if the javascript package - and other similar builds - where just a 'import' file one can load, and THEN one can export your setup without the worry that a bundle IS removed?
> Except that it does not list the plugins included IN the javascript package. > What I was suggesting is that rather than creating a bundle, it would be nice > if the javascript package - and other similar builds - where just a 'import' > file one can load, and THEN one can export your setup without the worry that a > bundle IS removed? Not sure what this means ... most things are installed by features, and you'd not need to worry about specific bundles ... unless you mean you have some other specific bundles in "dropins" or something. Seems the "export and import" scenario above would work for most things. (And to be honest, when did that show up? Pretty cool and I've never seen it before!). But, the subject package has been removed as of M2, so will close as "fixed". One thing I did want to document here was what features were going into it. It would be pretty trivial for someone to "create their own personal javascript/web developer tools installation" with something like the following script, once they had the Eclipse Platform or SDK installed. (The script is for linux, but would be similar for windows or others). ./eclipse/eclipse -nosplash \ -application org.eclipse.equinox.p2.director \ -repository http://download.eclipse.org/releases/juno/ \ -installIU \ org.eclipse.cvs.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.help.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.wst.common.fproj.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.wst.jsdt.feature.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.wst.xml_ui.feature.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.wst.web_ui.feature.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.wst.server_adapters.feature.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.wst.xsl.feature.feature.group,\ org.eclipse.epp.mpc.feature.group Hope that list helps. There's some things you do not get from this method, as you would the EPP package, such as the initial default perspective ... but, honestly, the JavaScript EPP package was not "adding" much beyond that, and the "bundling" of those 9 features, so I hope it is pretty easy for people to script their own solution if they need one.
> Import/Export > (And to be honest, when did that show up? Pretty cool and I've never seen it before!) Your list is exactly what I was missing ... And what I think *I* was suggesting is that an 'Export' of that list for the Javascript bundle, and probably some of the other similar bundles is all that is needed nowadays, but including some of the local settings in the export would be a nice to have?
