Fro the record, where I worked there was a company-standard template required.
Not so much a license, but a copyright notice. I think such requirements are
not that uncommon outside of OSS in the corporate world.
I think perhaps this feature would benefit from a few changes:
1 - allowing a per-project setting. Working on corporate stuff, vs various
open source projects, the license will change from one project to the next.
Not all projects use Maven, but if the project is a Maven project, then reading
the license information from the POM if it is there makes sense. Otherwise,
perhaps NB can add a .nb-license-default.txt file to the project folder (add
add it the version control as needed).
2 - A better default license might make more sense than the message in the
current default. For example a simple "Copyright {year} {username}” would
suffice.
3 - Use a gutter hint/tooltip to direct users to where to change the license if
it is the generic default.
4 - Possibly move the license setting to the “Team” section of the preferences?
License text is usually something that the team decides on and should be
consistent across the team, so I would certainly not be surprised to find it
there. It may also be more discoverable, as I have never ventured into the
templates except by being one fo the few in my organization that bothers to
read the default license text and take action. I think the hint in the gutter
might make it a little closer to reach, where the big list of templates in the
Template Manager tends to overwhelm people unfamiliar even though the current
instructions are fairly clear.
Currently the “Team” menu seems to be about version control. That’s related to
team settings I guess, but when I think Version Control, I don’t think “Team”.
It also seems to have some integration to Hudson (though I think most people
went to Jenkins when that drama unfolded). I can think of a lot of tweaks I
would do to the menu structure now that I look more closely at it. I think
I’ll write a separate email about that.
In my case at work, even having the text under “License" seemed misleading
because we weren’t thinking of the text as a license - we want a copyright
notice. What we are really changing is a default per-file comment. If I
didn’t pay attention to the message in the default license, my first instinct
would be to look for the template in “Other -> Java File” to change the text.
Though I understand that the license is applied to multiple file types, so I
get it.
Regards,,
Scott
> On Jun 9, 2020, at 5:41 PM, Jesse Glick <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think it is reasonable to simply make
> `Templates/Licenses/license-default.txt` be empty, or delete it if
> that does not break anything. If we want to alert developers that they
> _can_ get automatic license header insertion, for the minority
> (typically OSS devs) who would need it, there are better ways, like a
> hint popup suggesting you set a `license` in a Maven POM.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
