> Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > > But that was done in the last release of this binary too?
Right, it was. Neil C Smith wrote: > Looks like. I was busy at the time and hadn't looked. Although > Matthias and I -1'd the previous one on this point. The 4:2 vote happened in April 2021: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ r1ddbb8f62ffb02a50db688c958dcd52e1dd3652974550bad9c24e95d%40%3Cdev.netbeans.apache.org%3E Since then all releases of Apache NetBeans Language Server VSCode Extension `.vsix` complementary binary include nb-javac GPLv2CPE licensed binary. > It's a vote thread so not a blocking thing, and I'm pretty confident > license-wise we're OK. Right, we are OK. My take on it: All involved parties had a lot of time to stop the distribution... > But I'd like to see either ASF Legal OK the > different approach, or better > https://github.com/oracle/nb-javac/pull/26 merged ...none reacted in spite of being directly notified before the first release was uploaded to VSCode Marketplace. > before I'm > personally happy to not -1 a release with it in. It's a vote and everyone has a right to express own opinion. I am personally satisfied with current status quo. I plan to vote +1 on any NetBeans complementary binary with nb-javac included (anyone willing to modify NetBeans installers to include nb-javac, btw.?) and I believe enough voters will feel and vote the same. -jt --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
