There seems to be agreement around #251. Gj
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaes...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote: > Hey all, > > we need to get this out of the way. To summarize: > > For an unknown reason oracle decided to replace the browser icons in > the css.editor and web. browser.api with a generic icon. Lars took the > initiative and created a PR, that reinstates the icons: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/251 > > In addition a second PR was created, that held replacement icons: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/289 > > > There are two separate concerns: > > Copyright for the artwork and trademarks. > > For my evaluation please see: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/289# > issuecomment-346683201 > > > So I'm plan to: > > - merge PR-251 > - close PR-289 > > by Friday this week, unless someone raises founded reasons against that > plan. While founded reasons will be good enough to stop me, he/she > should also be prepared to come up with an alternative plan. > > Greetings > > Matthias > > > Am Samstag, den 02.12.2017, 18:01 +0100 schrieb Christian Lenz: > > PR 251 means readding the existing Icons, instead of the NB Icon > > placeholder. PR 289 is the one w/o having Icons. > > I prefer 251 too. > > > > Gesendet von Mail für Windows 10 > > > > Von: Neil C Smith > > Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Dezember 2017 14:02 > > An: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org > > Betreff: Re: Status of Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta > > > > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:00 PM Geertjan Wielenga < > > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > To be honest, I don't understand the difference between PR251 and > > > PR289 and > > > when I read the comments at the end of PR289, it seems like Neil > > > and > > > Matthias are both saying we should merge PR251, not PR289. > > > > > > > PR251 is the original icons, not the placeholders, I believe. > > > > There are two concerns with the original artwork - trademarks and > > copyright. > > > > Trademarks should be fine under fair-use according to the sources > > Matthias > > linked to (also my previous understanding), and I presume this is how > > they > > were used before?! Our mentors did request earlier (April I think) > > that we > > clarify trademark fair-use under Apache with legal. > > > > Copyright-wise, this affects the actual artwork, and why I asked > > about > > provenance. Ideally they'd have been kept in/with the donation, but > > I > > assume we can appropriate them under CDDL? > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Neil >
