On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Ate Douma: Only linking to an external download package, and/or instructions what to > do is.
Right, that's what I meant. The majority will simply click through the installer, specify they want to use Java and accept the licensing terms, have the two nb-javac libraries downloaded and installed from an external place into their installation, and be happy. The minority who don't want to have things installed during installation for some reason will be pointed elsewhere with instructions to get hold of the two JARs and install them manually. Gj On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote: > On 2016-11-08 11:11, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > >> Yup. I'm sure we can do a solution like where on the download page we'd >> specify that they can install the requirements for Java tooling during >> installation or via a download package on the same page as where the >> NetBeans installer itself is found. >> > > The latter, providing a download package for the nb-javac libraries on the > same > (ASF hosted) page as the installer is not allowed. > Only linking to an external download package, and/or instructions what to > do is. > > > >> Gj >> >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Leonardo Loch Zanivan < >> leonardo.zani...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The above is true for companies and educational institutions. >>> Internet access is very restricted and often require a proxy setup. >>> >>> Leonardo >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 6:21 AM Julien Enselme <jense...@jujens.eu> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I generally have no big problems with downloads at install time. >>>> However, some users may download the installer to install NetBeans on a >>>> computer without internet access. What then? Will Java will work in a >>>> degraded mode? Will it be possible for the user to manually install the >>>> JARs? >>>> >>>> IMHO, this shouldn't be a blocker since I don't think it represents >>>> many users but I still think we must not forget them. >>>> >>>> On Mon, 2016-11-07 at 18:31 -0500, Steven Yi wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> I'm all for the single installer with different module download >>>>> options. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:19 PM, John McDonnell <mcdonnell.john@gmail. >>>>> com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7 Nov 2016, at 23:13, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wielenga@goo >>>>>>> glemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the above would actually be a big improvement over the >>>>>>> current >>>>>>> situation where there are multiple downloads. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> A single download would definitely be simpler and this >>>>>> languages/technology choice could just be an extension of the >>>>>> current plugin mechanism. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> >>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7 Nov 2016, at 23:13, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wielenga@goo >>>>>>> glemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Good question and unclear at this point what the solution should >>>>>>> be. >>>>>>> Personally, wouldn't it be simplest to have one single download >>>>>>> (certainly >>>>>>> simpler than the current situation) and then the installer asks >>>>>>> which >>>>>>> languages/technologies you need? If, among others, Java is >>>>>>> selected, >>>>>>> nb-javac (simply two JAR files, by the way, at the end of the >>>>>>> day) would be >>>>>>> downloaded and installed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the above would actually be a big improvement over the >>>>>>> current >>>>>>> situation where there are multiple downloads. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gj >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:05 AM, John McDonnell <mcdonnell.john@g >>>>>>> mail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So how do you see this going forward? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Currently we have 6 download packages, will we have multiple >>>>>>>> ones when we >>>>>>>> Apache Netbeans is released?, or will we have 4 downloads >>>>>>>> (HTML+Javascript, >>>>>>>> PHP & C/C++, ALL), but the installer always gives the option to >>>>>>>> install >>>>>>>> Java? As I think I could get behind that, provided we don’t >>>>>>>> forget to >>>>>>>> advertise that Java is a “first class citizen” in the Netbeans >>>>>>>> Ecosystem. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 7 Nov 2016, at 22:56, Geertjan Wielenga < >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It would be a smooth process via the installer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Gj >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:43 PM, John Yeary <johnyeary@gmail. >>>>>>>>> com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello All, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree with John. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> One of the things that I really find annoying about Eclipse >>>>>>>>>> is that you >>>>>>>>>> have all of these options, and as a new user it is a >>>>>>>>>> daunting task to >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> pick >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> what you need, or even KNOW what you need. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If we start asking new users to go download modules to make >>>>>>>>>> it a >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> functional >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> IDE, it is a non-starter. The ease of use that NetBeans is >>>>>>>>>> known for >>>>>>>>>> suddenly is no longer. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ____________________________ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> John Yeary >>>>>>>>>> ____________________________ >>>>>>>>>> *NetBeans Dream Team* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *Founder Greenville Java Users GroupJava Users Groups >>>>>>>>>> Community Leader* >>>>>>>>>> ____________________________ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <http://javaevangelist.blogspot.com/> <https://twitter.com >>>>>>>>>> /jyeary> >>>>>>>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/johnyeary> <http://www.linkedin.co >>>>>>>>>> m/in/jyeary> >>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/112146428878473069965> >>>>>>>>>> <http://www.facebook.com/jyeary> >>>>>>>>>> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/JavaEvangelistJohnYearysBlog> >>>>>>>>>> <http://netbeans.org/people/84414-jyeary> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious >>>>>>>>>> triumphs, even >>>>>>>>>> though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those >>>>>>>>>> poor spirits >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> who >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in >>>>>>>>>> the gray >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> twilight >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> that knows not victory nor defeat." >>>>>>>>>> -- Theodore Roosevelt >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:28 PM, John McDonnell < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mcdonnell.j...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> HI, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To me Netbeans has always been first and foremost a Java >>>>>>>>>>> IDE. This >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> move >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> now seems to be making Java an optional extra to Netbeans >>>>>>>>>>> that means I >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> to head off somewhere else to get this nb-javac module. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Now I was probably wrong in always thinking that NB is a >>>>>>>>>>> Java IDE first >>>>>>>>>>> and foremost, as when I go to the Downloads[1] page 3 of >>>>>>>>>>> the 6 >>>>>>>>>>> download-able packages don’t contain Java. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is it worth getting download numbers for each of the 5 >>>>>>>>>>> packages and >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> seeing >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> what % of user base this change would effect currently? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Will this additional download drive Java Developers away >>>>>>>>>>> from Netbeans? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1]: https://netbeans.org/downloads/ >>>>>>>>>>> <https://netbeans.org/downloads/> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7 Nov 2016, at 15:27, Geertjan Wielenga < >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Shan Curcuru wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As a non-regular NetBeans user, I have a clarifying >>>>>>>>>>>>> question from a >>>>>>>>>>>>> *newcomers* perspective that I think will help on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> "ASF code means >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> licensing surprises" side. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1- Yes. Assuming we resolve other issues that are going >>>>>>>>>>>> to be coming >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> up, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> i.e., nb-javac is the current hurdle we're focusing on, >>>>>>>>>>>> though there >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> smaller ones to follow unrelated to this specific legal >>>>>>>>>>>> issue that >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> we're >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> now focused on. [See >>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Overview%3A+NetBeans+Structure >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to predict upcoming legal discussions.] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2- Yes. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3- Yes. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 4- Yes. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, and I agree, what we're doing is in sync with >>>>>>>>>>>> the "ASF code >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> means >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> no licensing surprises" side. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Gj >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Shane Curcuru <asf@shan >>>>>>>>>>>> ecurcuru.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2016-11-06 15:01 (-0500), Geertjan Wielenga >>>>>>>>>>>>> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Sun, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nov 6, 2016 at >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 4:59 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> PM, Ate Douma wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geertjan and others already clarified and are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documenting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> modularity of >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NetBeans [2], with the core NetBeans platform >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being the only >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> required >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> part. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All other modules (or clusters) being optional. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So many users might not need the NetBeans Java >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cluster. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...snip... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As a non-regular NetBeans user, I have a clarifying >>>>>>>>>>>>> question from a >>>>>>>>>>>>> *newcomers* perspective that I think will help on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> "ASF code means >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> licensing surprises" side. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1- If I want a great IDE where I can edit my C, >>>>>>>>>>>>> JavaScript, PHP, HTML >>>>>>>>>>>>> and other non-Java code, and check it in, build it, >>>>>>>>>>>>> etc. - can I >>>>>>>>>>>>> download NetBeans (plus perhaps some other modules) >>>>>>>>>>>>> where *all* of >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> source code I'm downloading is under a Category A >>>>>>>>>>>>> license? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2- If I then want to use NetBeans to edit/build Java >>>>>>>>>>>>> code, apparently >>>>>>>>>>>>> (as a new user) I need this nb-javac module from >>>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere else which >>>>>>>>>>>>> lets NetBeans the product do "useful stuff" with >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oracle's current >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Java, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> correct? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Java developers today would understand that Oracle's >>>>>>>>>>>>> Java platform - >>>>>>>>>>>>> which is widely known and used - has GPL related code >>>>>>>>>>>>> in it, so they >>>>>>>>>>>>> should not be surprised when they have to go download >>>>>>>>>>>>> nb-javac from >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oracle, nor should they be surprised when the sources >>>>>>>>>>>>> for nb-javac >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> also licensed under the GPL. Does that make sense? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3- Java developers who want to use NetBeans + nb- >>>>>>>>>>>>> javac to build their >>>>>>>>>>>>> own Apache-licensed Java programs for redistribution >>>>>>>>>>>>> would never need >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> worry about the GPL, because it would be clear as a >>>>>>>>>>>>> Java programmer >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> regular IDE user that the license of the IDE I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>> using to write/build >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> my >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> code doesn't affect the license I can use on the code >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm writing in >>>>>>>>>>>>> that IDE. Correct? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If all three of those are "Yes", then I'm +1 for this >>>>>>>>>>>>> solution and +1 >>>>>>>>>>>>> for LEGAL-279. The separation between Apache >>>>>>>>>>>>> licensed Netbeans as an >>>>>>>>>>>>> IDE and the underlying tooling integration with the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Java compiler >>>>>>>>>>>>> tooling using GPL seems clear, and given any >>>>>>>>>>>>> experienced Java >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> developer, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> they would not be surprised to see the licensing >>>>>>>>>>>>> difference. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4- If I want to extend the editing features in >>>>>>>>>>>>> NetBeans for Java code >>>>>>>>>>>>> (which I think you call "Java cluster"?), can I use >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Apache >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> license >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for patches and redistribution of the NetBeans editor >>>>>>>>>>>>> code that >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> displays >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the UI, syntax coloring, etc. elements? I.e. is the >>>>>>>>>>>>> editor portion >>>>>>>>>>>>> going to be all Apache, and it's just the compiler >>>>>>>>>>>>> (when tooling >>>>>>>>>>>>> integration sends code off to do bytecode) that is >>>>>>>>>>>>> under GPL? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Shane >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> Julien Enselme >>>> http://www.jujens.eu/ >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
