Hi,

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ...Please vote on releasing Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (incubating)!...

I have started reviewing
SHA1(incubating-netbeans-platform-9.0-alpha-source.zip)=
1189b293cecfd5236cf18df2c2bd0f6b414dab75

It's a big thing...I won't have time to finish today but here are a
few initial observations.

1) DEPENDENCIES lists 3 modules with GPL v2 with Classpath exception
which are not OK as required dependencies for an Apache project.

Looking closer, those are listed as compile time dependencies, which
would be ok - having to use GPL tools to build our projects is fine.

IIUC ./libs.javafx/external/openjfx-master-rt-8-license.txt for
example defines that openjfx is a compile-time dependency, but there's
no justification for it and I had to dig in to understand.

Would it be practical to add a comment field to that .txt file, which
is output to DEPENDENCIES to explain why you think it's compile-time
only?

If an entry in DEPENDENCIES says the following for example I think it
would clarify this:

From: OpenJDK (modified by NetBeans)
  - API Signature Testing Tool: Signature test modified for NetBeans
    License: GPL v2 with Classpath exception
(http://openjdk.java.net/legal/gplv2+ce.html)
    Comment: the API Signature Testing Tool is only used to check
signatures at build time

But as is I think a justification is missing, at least for those
otherwise prohibited licenses.

That's not necessarily a blocker for this release, a jira ticket
describing how this can be improved in the next release would be ok
for me.

2) I don't see a tag at https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans
for that release, shouldn't there be one? If only to find out what
changes between this and the next release or release candidate. Doing
multiple tags, one per release candidate, is fine IMO but I think
there should be tags - but maybe I missed them.

It looks like my next opportunity to review the release is next
Tuesday morning - but don't wait on me to send the vote to the IPMC if
other mentors find time to review the release.

-Bertrand

Reply via email to