I understand the frustration here. I'd suggest that with a large project like this [1], that has had many cases where the release would appear to be in violation of standards, that the [DISCUSS] and [VOTE] threads explicitly call out the issues, the RAT exclusions, and a small discussion of what "anomalies" have already been discussed and resolved.
And it would be worthwhile for the Mentors to explicitly discuss in their vote responses that there are many issues/solutions in the release that have already been resolved. Regards, Craig [1] the biggest one ever! > On Apr 1, 2019, at 3:15 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com.INVALID> wrote: > > OK, that’s fair. And possibly an indicator that when a podling is large, > and there are many moving parts, it would be best to, when needed, assume > the podling is doing the best they can under complex circumstances, rather > than that the podling is not following guidelines, ignoring advice, etc. > > Gj > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 12:09, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> > wrote: > >> One also has to see that NetBeans is an exceptionally big and complex >> podling! >> >> For most other projects the existing process works really fine. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >>> Am 01.04.2019 um 11:35 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com.INVALID>: >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:27 AM Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> We have also previously already checked those files and also have the >>>> sources at hand afaict. >>>> So they should be perfectly fine - as they have been in older NB >> releases >>>> (where we had the question as well). >>>> >>> >>> >>> I think this is the biggest problem with the incubator -- the fact that >> one >>> constantly needs to re-litigate decisions and agreements that have >> already >>> been made in previous releases. >>> >>> Pointing to a list of issues, or a Wiki where these items are listed, is >>> clearly not a solution -- the fact that we have been making use of Apache >>> Rat from the very beginning and that we have a Rat exclusions file was >> also >>> missed, a whole thread was started to bring our intransigence to the >>> attention of the world was started, etc etc. So, I don't see a solution >>> here and it is the IPMC vote that -- while being immensely valuable for >>> being the most detailed -- that invariable causes the most confusion and >>> wasting of time in re-litigating things. >>> >>> So, though I'd like to bring a solution to this, I do not have one. >>> >>> Gj >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> LieGrue, >>>> strub >>>> >>>> >>>>> Am 30.03.2019 um 07:23 schrieb Wade Chandler <wadechand...@apache.org >>> : >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 21:43 Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Theres are the binary inclusions that seem to contain compiled code, >> an >>>>>> ASF release should not include this: >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/com-example-testmodule-cluster.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-brokendepending.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-depending.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-depending_on_new_one_engine.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-engine-1-1.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-engine-1-2.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-engine.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-executable-permissions.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-fragment.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-independent-1-1.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-independent.nbm >>>>>> B >>>>>> >>>> >> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-refresh_providers_test.nbm >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To be clear, this is test data; not binary dependencies. Note the names >>>> of >>>>> those files. NetBeans has a module system, and those have nbm >> extensions. >>>>> These nbms are made to test very specific things that can be wrong in >>>>> modules. This would be like having tests for C/C++ linkers and object >>>> files >>>>> etc where you just want to validate the linking not rebuilding object >>>> files >>>>> for tests; rebuilding those every test run adds build time for no gain. >>>>> Make sense, and Ok? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> Wade >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> Craig L Russell Secretary, Apache Software Foundation c...@apache.org <mailto:c...@apache.org> http://db.apache.org/jdo <http://db.apache.org/jdo>
