Removing Photon.

[Jie Kang]

On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 4:11 AM Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 8:12 PM Marcus Hirt <marcus.hirt at datadoghq.com> wrote:
> >
> > Reasons for:
> > * Being able to use more recent additions and APIs.
> > * Less platforms to test against.
> >
> > Reasons against:
> > * Convenience in not having to upgrade Eclipse for people installing into older Eclipses.
> > I will not list convenience in not having to seek third-party approvals to be able to release RCP builds on old versions of the platform, since you'd normally would want the latest fixes in your release versions.
> >
> > That said, I'm not feeling strongly about this. If you have a strong reason for keeping it around, then we can.
>
> It makes downstream packaging more difficult when the baseline is a
> moving target, this is why I asked if there are strong reason. If
> there's API we need and there are no alternatives (or very less
> convenient ones), or if there is a critical fix that affects
> functionality but that makes it an incompatible change, this is a
> valid reason of course.
>
> Since this only affect the minimum version required to build and use
> JMC, and not the default one used upstream, I don't think we should
> move unless the afore requirement is met.
>
> That said, I always maintain that upstream should not necessarily care
> about downstreams or make decision solely based on downstream
> reasoning, but being good citizens is nice if we can help.

Hi Marcus, Mario,

I think the content added/removed for building with a target platform
is so minimal, so self-contained and so trivial that a removal is not
a problem.


Regards,

>
> Cheers,
> Mario
>
> --
> Mario Torre
> Associate Manager, Software Engineering
> Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
> 9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898
>