Follow my microblog on Twitter at dougschaefer

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Too few cooks

On Planet Eclipse we've had some harsh but healthy discussion on how Eclipse could be better organized for success. There are probably little things that need to be done, but at the end, I think the conclusion is that the Foundation staff are doing a pretty good job and Eclipse is organized to accomplish what it was intended to, to provide an open ecosystem for companies to work together on Eclipse platform technologies.

But I am still very worried about Eclipse. And the main problem I am seeing is that there are too few people making the wheels turn, especially as we push Galileo out the door. I figure if we removed probably 3 or 4 people from the equation, Galileo would stop dead in it's tracks and the release wouldn't happen. That is scary in my books. Even on the CDT, if I didn't do the countdown to releases, as I've done for the past 5 years or so, the CDT wouldn't release either. Or at the very least, someone else would have to jump in. And I won't even start with the e4 flexible resource project which currently has one part time guy actually doing code.

That's a pretty big burden for those few. And give the number of commercial vendors that rely on Eclipse technologies, I wonder if it's fair. The good news is that these few people have a lot of passion and are very focused on making Eclipse releases happen. So it will be a success. But understaffed projects is a chronic problem at Eclipse and that's where I fear it's future.

Maybe this fear comes from my own situation where I've been reduced to pretty much working on CDT in my hobby time plus a few hours here and there in my day job. But I know a lot of people in the same position and really wonder how we'll accomplish our goals in the upcoming year for Eclipse. That's the reality we need to figure out how to deal with and improve. Eclipse governance problems is incredibly minor compared to that.

3 comments:

Antoine said...

Very good post! I agree with all your points, but I think the Eclipse governance should just be changed to accomodate with those facts - don't run after commercial members, go get committers instead.

Tom said...

Doug, I could not agree more with you. In contrast to Antoine I think what we need is not more committers but more full-time committers.

This even more important for E4 than for the current Eclipse 3.x stream.

Looking on my own contributions on E4 I'd say I getting out of the game more and more because it's not enough to look at the code some time in the evening you need to work on the code all day long.

It makes me sad because I really see the need for E4, have many ideas on how things could work but I have to face the reality - I simply don't have time to work on it every day - so whenever I start to get my hands dirty I have to restart understanding the codebase (which is simpler for me because I was there from the start but is out-of-scope for someone who hasn't been)

Jesper said...

Spot on.

As an occasional contributor, my impression is that there's just not enough people to review bugs and patches and keep ownership of the various components.

As a former individual committer (XSL Tools, in incubation) who just wasn't active enough (life happens), I think it would help to encourage project "hangarounds":
People who knew the codebase, and would be willing to assist the committers in bug triage, reviewing and testing patches, etc. from the contrbutors at large. While they wouldn't necessary have the direction and resources to work on significant areas of new functionality (and wouldn't be "in the loop" that the bigger member companies sometimes keep to themselves), they might still help to keep the "code rot" away, to improve response time on bugs, etc. This possibly exitsts in practise anyway, but I think it should be encouraged, so that the committers had a better feeling of which contributors to turn to for help.

Sure, code talks, but even if you can't code Eclipse all day, you can still contribute.

Post a Comment