Re: [che-dev] RFC: Eclipse Cloud Development Tools working group proposa

["Delchev, Nedelcho" <nedelcho.delchev@xxxxxxx>]

+ ecd-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx

 

I also agree, that we have to spend a bit more time in defining the scope precisely. LSP and DAP can be considered in scope, but cannot be the (only) focus. Let’s discuss this in today’s ECD PMC call https://wiki.eclipse.org/ECD/PMC

 

Regards,

Nedelcho

 

From: <che-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Mario <mario.loriedo@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: che developer discussions <che-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, 8 November 2018, 0:00
To: che developer discussions <che-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [che-dev] RFC: Eclipse Cloud Development Tools working group proposal

 

That's a great idea but we need to work on the scope. LSP and DAP are not specific to Cloud Development (besides being originated by Microsoft). Putting the focus on those topics looks weird. 

 

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 3:14 PM Thomas Mäder <tmader@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Dave,

 

I think it's a great idea to get people who develop around the language protocol family around a table. However, by marrying this to "cloud development", you exclude probably the most important member of the group: Microsoft. VSCode (where a lot of this stuff originates) is not a cloud IDE in any sense.

 

/Thomas

 

 

 

On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 14:55 -0500, Dave Neary wrote:

Oops - forgot link:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uygw254YUiSqjN5IaLLXK4hiIN5pY-wrQkOag5fDk8I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Dave.

On 11/06/2018 12:02 PM, Dave Neary wrote:

Hi everyone,

I put together a draft working group proposal for the Eclipse Foundation

to engender greater collaboration across ECD projects - this is the

initial draft, which is now open for comments.

I would love feedback, specifically around the scope. The initial scope

I had imagined was around interoperability and adoption of LSP, but

through the EclipseCon day, it was clear that extensions to LSP for

debugging, tracing, testing, profiling, and more would be interesting to

consider, and I think that collaboration on the definition and

implementation of extensions should be in scope. Another suggestion I

received was that the working group could agree on what is required for

the definition of a cloud developer workspace. I am open to having this

in scope,m but this draft does not yet reflect that.

Please let me know:

1) if you or your employer is interested in participating in this

working group

2) Whether you have any concerns about the scope or activities of the

working group

3) Any edits you feel should be made to the charter to improve clarity

and enable members to work together more effectively

We will discuss the working group and the draft during the next Che

community meeting on Monday.

Thank you all!

Dave.

_______________________________________________
che-dev mailing list
che-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/che-dev