On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:32 PM Bertrand Delacretaz <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:44 PM Jan Lahoda <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...Frankly, I wonder if there's a chance to allow some "good" uses, like > "X > > with Apache NetBeans N" or a "Bundle of X and Apache NetBeans N", > provided > > some basic conditions are met,... > > Of course that's possible, as Geertjan says the NetBeans (P)PMC just needs > to clarify how things have to be named, to avoid confusion and especially > as you say make it crystal clear what comes from Apache NetBeans and what > does not. > Good to hear, thanks. > > > ...this would > > be distributing an official release of NetBeans, just packed together > with > > something else.... > > If it's binaries then no, it is not distributing an official release > because releases consist only of source code. > Yes, I was sloppy here, I apologize. But at least partially intentionally, as I didn't want to set a very particular form of how NetBeans could be included. (Although, frankly, if someone actually would bundle the source release and provide a "convenience script" to build that, that allows for a fair amount of "creativity", possibly even too much of that. I'd be much happier if the "convenience binary signed by the release manager, voted and approved by (P)PPMC and corresponding to an Apache NetBeans official release" would be used.) Jan > It's redistributing a convenience binary...I think we need to clarify at > the Apache level this difference, I recently proposed a two-level view on > releases and convenience binaries [1] which has not made its way to our > official docs yet but should help understand. > > -Bertrand > > [1] > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/01a64394c3996406d98904256ebdd46667bf73947983722e7ab57f50@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E >
