TeXlipse discontinued?

Help
WM
2014-02-27
2014-04-20
  • WM
    WM
    2014-02-27

    Is there any chance that active development of TeXclipse will be
    continued? In its current state, TeXclipse seems rather unfinished.
    There are a lot of annoying bugs (e.g., soft word wrapping,
    autocompletion, automated building) and some features are implemented
    very poorly (e.g., spell checking). It would be a shame if TeXclipse
    stayed this way since its integration to Eclipse is an outstanding
    feature and it has a lot of potential for becoming a solid LaTeX
    editor.

     
  • Bernd Gloss
    Bernd Gloss
    2014-03-22

    Is TeXlipse really stopped? I never saw an official statement about its status. However, when looking to the bug tracker and the date of the latest release, it is apparent that there is no further activity.

    I definitely support your statements on the importance of TeXlipse. It would be a big loss for me if it is discontinued. In my case, it cannot easily be replaced by other IDEs, such as TeXStudio, TeXWorks, etc. due to the easy access to other projects in the same workspace, e.g., Python/NumPy/SciPy.

     
    Last edit: Bernd Gloss 2014-03-22
  • Matthias Erll
    Matthias Erll
    2014-03-30

    I would not say it is discontinued, but the development has certainly not been going forward much lately. As one of the contributors, I can only say what my personal reasons are. I still use TeXlipse for occasional tasks, but the heavy use has faded significantly since I finished studying. This does not mean that I do not see the importance for improvement, but the open bugs and feature requests have been outside my original scope and experience, and I would need more time to look into them. On the other hand, there has been less spare time that I had to dedicate to this project.
    Looking at the development history, I assume the change of maintainers and contributors has similar causes. And there have been few new contributions.

    Anyway, there has been significant work since version 1.5.0, and the modified version seems quite stable on two installations. It has not been released since I cannot consider these usage tests sufficient, especially considering that changes were made in quite fundamental parts. Nevertheless the work has been published and feedback is welcome.

    Some changes are made in the branch "me_buildcycle". The building system and log parser have been re-designed for the most part for detecting external programs such as Biblatex and Biber more reliably, as well as the point to run them. In more detail, the output files are monitored rather than relying on parsing the source code.

    Later I opened another branch "me_commands", which basically makes few functional changes, but uses more recent Eclipse API elements. This fixes the issues since Eclipse 3.5 of duplicate entries in the tool bar.

    Both branches are merged in "me_new" (I removed "me" since I had screwed up the merge there). With some feedback and thorough testing, I could make further improvements to bring these into a release.

    Best Regards,
    Matthias

     
  • Pål
    Pål
    2014-04-20

    Hi

    I have been an active user for several years of TeXlipse.
    I've been looking at contributing for a while, though my time has been limited. But I have now checked out the me_new branch and will be testing it.
    In addition I have started to look at the code in order to familiarising myself with it for future contributions.

    So far the me_new works ok. Is there anything special you want tested?

    Regards

    Pål

     
  • Matthias Erll
    Matthias Erll
    2014-04-20

    Hi Pål,

    thank you for the feedback. In regards to the changes in the branch, tests or observations could be focused on the following:

    • Generally, how does the builder work in combination with various project layouts, LaTeX programs (latex, pdflatex etc.), utility programs (e.g. biber), and packages producing additional log output?
    • More specifically, are errors reported meaningfully?
    • Are errors and warnings assigned to the appropriate source file (and line, if applicable)?
    • Are changes in source files (e.g. tex or bibliography) considered correctly for a rebuild?
    • If utility programs are not run as necessary, does adding the -recorder flag to the LaTeX command line improve the result?

    Best Regards,
    Matthias