{"thread":{"id":"14656","subject":"[EGIT] Supported Eclipse version","startedAt":"2008-07-24T13:57:02Z","lastAt":"2008-07-25T19:35:41Z","messageCount":5,"participants":["Marek Zawirski","Jean-François Veillette","Shawn O. Pearce","Robin Rosenberg"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"84716","messageId":"48888A2E.4030302@gmail.com","threadId":"14656","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[EGIT] Supported Eclipse version","fromName":"Marek Zawirski","fromEmail":"marek.zawirski@gmail.com","sentAt":"2008-07-24T13:57:02Z","receivedAt":"2008-07-24T13:57:02Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"marek.zawirski@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"This topic arose after 3.4 release. Are we dropping support for 3.2.x \nrelease or not?\n\nI've recently reported some bug at eclipse.org bugzilla regarding broken \nFileDialog for 3.3.x and it was closed, marked as resolved in 3.4 with \ncomment that 3.3.x stream is finished. Actually, this bug is not \ncritical, just annoying.\n\nIt just seems that eclipse.org is trying to force users to update their \nEclipse soon after next stable release.\n3.3 also added some interesting APIs, Robin mentioned it one day. I'm \ncurrently just touching TableViewer API and it also have some nice new \nfeatures being available since 3.3.\n\nDo we still have to be compatible with 3.2 release? It's about 2 years \nold, with last synchronized release/build February 2007. On the other \nhand, some commercial tools are still based upon 3.2 release.\n\nMaybe some users (or developers) from mailing list can tell us about \ntheir opinion?\n\nMarek Zawirski\n"},{"id":"84718","messageId":"89D1384A-403C-4E6E-816C-204AE0AAC30C@yahoo.ca","threadId":"14656","inReplyTo":"48888A2E.4030302@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [EGIT] Supported Eclipse version","fromName":"Jean-François Veillette","fromEmail":"jean_francois_veillette@yahoo.ca","sentAt":"2008-07-24T14:07:59Z","receivedAt":"2008-07-24T14:07:59Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jean_francois_veillette@yahoo.ca","avatar":null},"body":"> Maybe some users (or developers) from mailing list can tell us \n> about their opinion?\n\nI think keeping comptability for one version behind the \n'current' (still compatible 3.3 while 3.4 is the current) is a \nreasonable goal.\n3.2 is relatively far behind, tools vendor had time to get up to date \nby now.\nIf a user is using a third party version of eclipse based on 3.2, \nthen I guess he should not expect egit to work with it (he should \njust pray and hope for the best).\n\nFor myself, I use 3.3.x, I have not yet moved to 3.4 since my main \nplugin (WOLips) is not ready yet for 3.4.\n\n- jfv\n"},{"id":"84885","messageId":"4889DF49.3000903@gmail.com","threadId":"14656","inReplyTo":"89D1384A-403C-4E6E-816C-204AE0AAC30C@yahoo.ca","subject":"Re: [EGIT] Supported Eclipse version","fromName":"Marek Zawirski","fromEmail":"marek.zawirski@gmail.com","sentAt":"2008-07-25T14:12:25Z","receivedAt":"2008-07-25T14:12:25Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"marek.zawirski@gmail.com","avatar":null},"body":"Jean-François Veillette wrote:\n>> Maybe some users (or developers) from mailing list can tell us about \n>> their opinion?\n>\n> I think keeping comptability for one version behind the 'current' \n> (still compatible 3.3 while 3.4 is the current) is a reasonable goal.\n> 3.2 is relatively far behind, tools vendor had time to get up to date \n> by now.\n> If a user is using a third party version of eclipse based on 3.2, then \n> I guess he should not expect egit to work with it (he should just pray \n> and hope for the best).\n>\n> For myself, I use 3.3.x, I have not yet moved to 3.4 since my main \n> plugin (WOLips) is not ready yet for 3.4.\n>\n> - jfv\nI would also vote for this change. Especially if there are not many \nusers screaming that they need egit in Eclipse 3.2.\n\nBTW, I'm using 3.4 version for 2 days and it looks really nice. What's \nimportant, it seems to not be that buggy as early 3.3 releases were.\n\nRobin, Shawn, would you accept next patches using 3.3 API?\n\nMarek\n"},{"id":"84895","messageId":"20080725161652.GA21117@spearce.org","threadId":"14656","inReplyTo":"4889DF49.3000903@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [EGIT] Supported Eclipse version","fromName":"Shawn O. Pearce","fromEmail":"spearce@spearce.org","sentAt":"2008-07-25T16:16:52Z","receivedAt":"2008-07-25T16:16:52Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"spearce@spearce.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/34844?v=4"},"body":"Marek Zawirski wrote:\n> Jean-François Veillette wrote:\n>>> Maybe some users (or developers) from mailing list can tell us about \n>>> their opinion?\n>>\n>> I think keeping comptability for one version behind the 'current' \n>> (still compatible 3.3 while 3.4 is the current) is a reasonable goal.\n>> 3.2 is relatively far behind, tools vendor had time to get up to date \n>> by now.\n>\n> Robin, Shawn, would you accept next patches using 3.3 API?\n\nYes, we should be dropping support for 3.2 now and supporting only\n3.3 and 3.4 going forward. 3.2 is ancient and anyone who is serious\naboug using Git with Eclipse really should be on a more current\nversion of the tools.\n\nSame argument that Junio gave about not supporting Debian users who\nare still installing git 1.4.4.4 and hope it works; we suggest they\ninstall the 1.5.x based backport as soon as possible.\n\nCommercial Eclipse distributions that are still based upon 3.2\nshould be upgrading themselves to 3.3 real soon, and if not, their\nusers should be forching them to do it.\n\n-- \nShawn.\n"},{"id":"84927","messageId":"200807252135.41434.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com","threadId":"14656","inReplyTo":"20080725161652.GA21117@spearce.org","subject":"Re: [EGIT] Supported Eclipse version","fromName":"Robin Rosenberg","fromEmail":"robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com","sentAt":"2008-07-25T19:35:41Z","receivedAt":"2008-07-25T19:35:41Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"robin.rosenberg@dewire.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/46357?v=4"},"body":"fredagen den 25 juli 2008 18.16.52 skrev Shawn O. Pearce:\n> Marek Zawirski wrote:\n> > Jean-François Veillette wrote:\n> >>> Maybe some users (or developers) from mailing list can tell us about \n> >>> their opinion?\n> >>\n> >> I think keeping comptability for one version behind the 'current' \n> >> (still compatible 3.3 while 3.4 is the current) is a reasonable goal.\n> >> 3.2 is relatively far behind, tools vendor had time to get up to date \n> >> by now.\n> >\n> > Robin, Shawn, would you accept next patches using 3.3 API?\n> \n> Yes, we should be dropping support for 3.2 now and supporting only\n> 3.3 and 3.4 going forward. 3.2 is ancient and anyone who is serious\n> aboug using Git with Eclipse really should be on a more current\n> version of the tools.\n\nWe already dropped 3.2 compatibility with the push/fetch support. That\nwas an accident, of course. \n\nSupport for 3.3 could also end ahead of schedule if we absolutely need\nsome feature that is only available in 3.4. We'll discuss that then, when/if\nit happens. The plan is to support 3.3 until 3.5 is out (or even longer if\nthat requires no effort).\n\nSo much for intent. We reserve the right to change our minds or make mistakes\nwithout notice.\n\n-- robin\n"}]}