groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MG <mg...@arscreat.com>
Subject Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support
Date Sat, 02 Jun 2018 20:19:28 GMT
Hi Daniil,

I have voted for the Groovy 3.0 Features child issues 
(https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050#tab=Linked%20Issues).

Cheers,
mg


On 02.06.2018 15:52, Daniil Ovchinnikov wrote:
>> none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue seems to 
>> have any votes
> Yep, I should’ve clarified this earlier and invited users to vote.
>
>> in the end I myself would just upvote every child issue
> And this is good. It’s much better than to upvote parent task and 
> forget about it.
> At least you will get a notification when each task is closed contrary 
> to umbrella task that may remain open for a long time.
>
>> I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first
> That’s what I’m now doing with 3.0 tasks. But upvotes do matter.
>
> —
>
> Daniil Ovchinnikov
> JetBrains
>
>
>> On 2 Jun 2018, at 02:30, MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com 
>> <mailto:mgbiz@arscreat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I just checked, and none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 
>> umbrella issue (https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050) 
>> seems to have any votes. I find that not surprising: As a developer 
>> that uses Groovy in place of Java to develop a larger framework using 
>> IntelliJ IDE, I can only use a Groovy feature once it has gotten 
>> proper IntelliJ support. I can toy around with it before that, of 
>> course, but to e.g. to finally be able to get rid of using the 
>> new-keyword in my project, IntelliJ support is tantamount. Other new 
>> features will be useful in different ways, other again I will have to 
>> check out further, to find where I can use them best. That makes a 
>> meaningful pioritization hard - in the end I myself would just upvote 
>> every child issue...
>>
>> Others may see this differently of course, but I need support for all 
>> features, as fast as possible ;-)
>>
>> To prioritize, I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first.
>> (Or once you have create the technicl child issues in the way you 
>> need them structured, you can ask people to vote between 2 or 3 
>> issues here / the Groovy Slack... (unless Paul/Jochen/Guillaume/... 
>> object, of course).)
>>
>> It would be interesting to learn a little bit about the effort that 
>> goes into certain features, btw,
>> Cheers,
>> mg
>>
>>
>> On 01.06.2018 23:51, mg wrote:
>>> Hi Daniil,
>>>
>>> I am a bit confused here: For Groovy 3.0 someone created a similar 
>>> issue, people voted on it to show that Groovy 3.0 feature support 
>>> was important to them, you created a handful of child issues, and 
>>> everything seemed well & fine :-)
>>> How is this different then ?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> mg
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
>>> Von: Daniil Ovchinnikov <daniil.ovchinnikov@jetbrains.com>
>>> Datum: 01.06.18 22:42 (GMT+01:00)
>>> An: users@groovy.apache.org
>>> Betreff: Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support
>>>
>>> Hi mg,
>>>
>>> First of all thank you for caring.
>>>
>>> I just want to let you know that such abstract tickets have almost 
>>> zero meaning other than serving as a parent for other smaller tasks.
>>> It would be much more helpful to prioritize if you create a ticket 
>>> for some particular feature and let others vote for it.
>>>
>>> —
>>>
>>> Daniil Ovchinnikov
>>> JetBrains
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 1 Jun 2018, at 21:09, MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com 
>>>> <mailto:mgbiz@arscreat.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have created a Jetbrains issue you can vote on for IntelliJ to 
>>>> fully support Groovy 2.5 as soon as possible :-)
>>>>
>>>> https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-193168
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> mg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>


Mime
View raw message