Hi. One option that hasn't been discussed yet is to merge work done in the [jdk-javac branch]( https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/tree/jdk-javac).
When this branch is merged, the Apache-NetBeans.zip download will be able to work out of the box with the latest JDK9 javac. I believe it is the right way to go forward as: - this proposal makes NetBeans Java IDE usable without any addition GPL download - unlike other proposals, this one is implemented and almost ready - it shows NetBeans strong connection with JDK by directly using the same javac used for compilation - it may encourage the JDK team to test their javac changes in NetBeans - it makes latest language features instantly available in the IDE Of course there are also some drawbacks: - error recovery & co. isn't as great in nb-javac - no support for running on JDK8 However these drawbacks can be overcome by downloading & installing nb-javac for those users that really care. Possibly we can also get an Apache board exception to distribute nb-javac as an optional component and get the best of both solutions. In any case, merging the jdk-javac branch is my favourite solution to our "nb-javac problem". -jt 2017-11-14 19:54 GMT+01:00 Jan Lahoda <lah...@gmail.com>: > Hello, > > As we should be looking at working on the Java IDE part now (vote for the > platform release is running), I guess it is time to discuss what exactly we > do with nb-javac. Most of the Java editing features depend on a library > called "nb-javac" (features that are not Java related should work even > without nb-javac), which is basically a fork of javac from OpenJDK (under > GPLv2+CPE) with adjustments to make it work better inside NetBeans. This > cannot be distributed with Apache NetBeans, but my understanding is that > the user can add the library manually (and that the IDE can help with > that): > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-279 > > So, I wonder what exactly do we do. There are two options: > a) just provide guidance to the user to manually download the library and > place it at the proper place. The current infrastructure mostly supports > this, we just might need to have some better texts in the initial dialog > about modules that cannot be enabled. > > b) attempt to more automatically download the library - this would need > some more work I think, and I wonder if this is acceptable. (Also, there > may be proxy issues, as the IDE would not be really started at that point.) > > Another aspect is from where to download the library: I assume we would > need a reasonably stable place to which we could point the users. > > Are there any opinions on this? > > Thanks, > Jan >
