TLDR;
If the option: „Install in Development IDE“ doesn’t work correctly, it should 
be fixed with steps to reproduce or removed if this is not working at all or 
not the recommended way ever. To say: To recommend it, not doing it, if it is 
still possible, is not the right way IMHO.

So in short, please fix it if it makes problems with steps to reproduce or 
discuss to remove the option.


Cheers

Chris



Von: Geertjan Wielenga
Gesendet: Dienstag, 15. Oktober 2019 09:25
An: dev
Betreff: Re: What is the correct way to install the modules in current computer

I would recommend you don't do that, you deploy it to a new instance. I
don't know what UAT is. You can also simply install the NBM file, like any
other NBM file.

Gj

On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 9:21 AM Peter Cheung <mcheun...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Geertjan
>     Yes, i debug my module in different instance. But I feel my module is
> quite stable now, so i want to do UAT for myself by installing it to my
> netbeans. So far i do "Install/Reload in Development IDE", then netbeans
> hangs, then i kill the process and restart it. It is fine to me now but
> just want to know how people do that.
> Thanks
> From Peter
> ________________________________
> From: Geertjan Wielenga <geert...@apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 3:16 PM
> To: dev <dev@netbeans.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: What is the correct way to install the modules in current
> computer
>
> Well, you're going to need to provide more info, if you want that fixed --
> log messages.
>
> Also, it is better to always run a module into a different instance of
> NetBeans, which you can also do by right-clicking the module and choosing
> that option.
>
> Gj
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 9:11 AM Peter Cheung <mcheun...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Guys
> >    When you developing modules, you must want to install it locally when
> > it reach a stable stage. How you do it? If i click "Install/Reload in
> > Development IDE", the netbeans will hangs, so i believe it is not the
> > recommended way.
> > Thanks
> > From Peter
> >
>

Reply via email to