Hi Guys,
I'm sorry for the long silence, I simply completely missed the whole
communication due to my Email settings. Jarda has contacted me and I'll try to
catchup this weekend.
--Toni
Am 22.02.19, 09:56 schrieb "Jaroslav Tulach" <jaroslav.tul...@gmail.com>:
Thanks for the mailing list heads-up! I talked to Toni and explained that
20 days silence in an issue resolution is undesirable. Hopefully a way to
avoid that in the future has been agreed upon.
PR-1143 seems to resolve the licensing problem, so I've just merged it.
-jt
st 20. 2. 2019 v 4:46 odesílatel Jaroslav Tulach <jaroslav.tul...@gmail.com>
napsal:
> -1 (e.g. veto) to the revert proposal.
>
> Dne středa 20. února 2019 1:03:36 CET, Matthias Bläsing napsal(a):
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, den 13.02.2019, 20:01 +0100 schrieb Matthias Bläsing:
> > > Am Mittwoch, den 13.02.2019, 10:44 -0800 schrieb Laszlo Kishalmi:
> > > > BTW, as we are not really going to release this build and that would
> be
> > > > true for the next one.
> > > > Shall we play the release dance and upload everything to the staging
> > > > area and create vote threads?
> > >
> > > we can skip this. We have a release blocker right in the LICENSE file:
> > >
> > > [JavaFX binaries are packaged with Apache NetBeans]
> > >
> > > @Toni, could you please have a look at the comments in the JavaFX PR:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/917
> > >
> > > and the corresponding issue:
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-1995
> >
> > I intent to revert the changes that were committed as the PR titled
> > "Fragments for libs.javafx with JavaFX 11 implementation #917".
> >
> > The primary reason: the PR messes with the build process
>
> OK, as far as I can see build is slightly complicated. That is not a
> reason
> for revert.
>
> > and let it
> > look like GPLv2-CP runtime libraries are pulled into the build.
>
> "look like" isn't reason for revert.
>
> > Secondary reasons:
> >
> > - the local maven repository is hardcoded to $HOME/.m2
>
> OK, feel free to propose a fix. Not a revert.
>
>
> > => Anyone using a windows installation with roaming profiles and a not
> > so fast network will know, that having .m2 at the default location is a
> > bad idea
> >
> > - the m2 url handler will not handle non Maven-Central URLs
>
> As far as I can tell, that is not a bug, but feature.
>
> > => There are other popular maven repositories (bintray), that might be
> > relevant for us.
>
> "might be" isn't reason for revert.
>
> Best regards.
> -jt
>
>
> > While looking into this, I noticed, that the generation of license file
> > needs rereview, as the per-nbm files also contain per-file licenses for
> > files not included in that nbm. Maybe both problems can be tackled
> > togehter.
> >
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > Matthias
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >
> > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
