> 1. Agreeing (VOTE?) on a new verification policy
I can start the VOTE thread whether to keep the separation of update
centers (all vs. verified plugins) or get rid of the verification
process, but don't you Ernie/Neil want to do that yourself being the
ones who seek for the change?
> For a new policy that has some automatic verification
Just FYI, all (even not verified) plugins are automatically available
right after their publishing on so called experimental update centers
such as this one for NetBeans 24:
https://netbeans-vm1.apache.org/pluginportal/data/24/catalog-experimental.xml.gz,
so the easiest solution would be to just replace the official plugin
portal update center with verified plugins i.e.
https://netbeans-vm1.apache.org/pluginportal/data/24/catalog.xml.gz by
the experimental one and nobody will have to wait for anything anymore.
> I've always thought of Jiří Kovalský as Mr. Plugin 😎
Yes, some 22 years ago I was tasked to come up with a proposal for a
live repository of NetBeans plugins, which would be open for anyone and
it was me who recommended some elementary verification of the plugins by
community volunteers before publishing in the update center. Knowing how
obsolete the process became over the years I admit the time has come for
a new Mr. Plugin or leaving the chair empty, depending on the result of
the voting. :)
-Jirka
Dne 20. 11. 24 v 18:25 Ernie Rael napsal(a):
On 24/11/20 4:40 AM, Neil C Smith wrote:
FWIW I remain in favour of running the whole thing from a git repo
with GH issues and PRs used to manage verification, like everything
else. However, I'm no longer in a position to work on that.
If the current process is 1.5 months (half a release!) behind, it's
not working.
Looking at updating the process as two parts
1. Agreeing (VOTE?) on a new verification policy
2. Implementing infrastructure as needed
If a VOTE is negative, then done.
For a new policy that has some automatic verification, then that could
be done immediately without any infrastructure change and would reduce
the current burden (if all the backlog is new stuff, then it actually
doesn't change anything).
Setting up a place (new repo, or whatever, for reporting verification
issues) seems like could be done easily. And further implementation as
possible and/or resources available.
I have no idea how (behind the scenes, responsible party...) a VOTE is
called. I've always thought of Jiří Kovalský as Mr. Plugin 😎
At the same time, I have some concerns about
non-committers having verification permissions.
+1
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing*lists__;Kw!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!J8aAi8DEj0tn8N1MnjqNLKViRwEqRr9TOVnIZmImqXzuKM6h8aH-srKIJYoH4Gu6VUkCDqnRAQBMapsn180$
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
