Re: nb16 source verification

[Michael Bien]

On 11.01.23 08:26, Svata Dedic wrote:

Hi,

downloaded right now - SHA512 seems correct (did you checked by 
sha512, not sha1 :) ?), and even the GPG signature is OK - but Neil's 
signing key expired just today (signed on 21. Nov 2022)


gonna put this on my notes since this is something which should be 
checked in an automated fashion by CI too once/if we add a workflow 
which checks release artifacts.


-mbien


Maybe the release should be signed next time by a key which is at 
least 6 months before expiration or something like that, so it 
survives to the next release.


-S.

On 11. 01. 23 3:37, Ernie Rael wrote:

Just downloaded source from https://netbeans.apache.org/download/nb16/

I'm getting verification failures with both sha and gpg.

I have to figure it out every time, could be cockpit error; but this 
seems like a real failure.


-ernie


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: nb16 source verification

[Svata Dedic]

Hi,

downloaded right now - SHA512 seems correct (did you checked by sha512, 
not sha1 :) ?), and even the GPG signature is OK - but Neil's signing 
key expired just today (signed on 21. Nov 2022)


Maybe the release should be signed next time by a key which is at least 
6 months before expiration or something like that, so it survives to the 
next release.


-S.

On 11. 01. 23 3:37, Ernie Rael wrote:

Just downloaded source from https://netbeans.apache.org/download/nb16/

I'm getting verification failures with both sha and gpg.

I have to figure it out every time, could be cockpit error; but this 
seems like a real failure.


-ernie


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[Michael Bien]

Hi Laszlo,

The platform tests have 90% of the testing done on JDK 8, there are only 
a few tests which are repeated again on 11 at the end of the jobs. Right 
now "Platform Modules batch1" is building platform-src.zip in isolation 
on JDK 11, not on 8, since 11 is currently the build requirement for 
NetBeans.


Ideally we should be able to simply run the platform tests in a [8, 11] 
matrix, but we can't, see below.


The other jobs which run on 8 and probably should stay on 8 are VSCode 
Ext and LSP. But would be good to have clarification on that one - I am 
sailing blind there.


There are some more jobs additional to those above which still test on 8 
since they can't run on 11 but potentially should, which is tracked with 
#4904.


I have put the JDK version in the job title so its easy to inspect, here 
is a full run with all jobs enabled on master for a quick overview:

https://github.com/apache/netbeans/actions/runs/3886947624/usage

best regards,
michael


On 10.01.23 20:28, László Kishalmi wrote:

Well, I think we can remove the CV for Java 8.
Probably the only Java 8 thing we shall do is make sure that the platform
sources can be compiled and tested on Java 8.


On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 7:28 AM Michael Bien  wrote:


On 10.01.23 16:25, Ernie Rael wrote:

On 23/01/10 6:16 AM, Michael Bien wrote:


Given that NB doesn't really support running on JDK 11 since a while
I would simply opt for 2) and merge.



Typo? JDK-11 --> JDK-8

yes, thanks for spotting this!

-mbien


-ernie



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

nb16 source verification

[Ernie Rael]

Just downloaded source from https://netbeans.apache.org/download/nb16/

I'm getting verification failures with both sha and gpg.

I have to figure it out every time, could be cockpit error; but this 
seems like a real failure.


-ernie


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: Prepare for more Gradle tweaks

[László Kishalmi]

Thanks!

Going to file a PR soon>
BTW: Gradle 8.0-rc-1 is on master.

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 4:30 PM Scott Palmer  wrote:

> I just noticed that the injected 'runSingle' task seems to provoke this
> warning"
>
> > Task :app:runSingle
> Hello World!
>
> Deprecated Gradle features were used in this build, making it incompatible
> with Gradle 8.0.
>
> That's running the Java file from NetBeans with Gradle 7.5 via the
> Gradle Wrapper.  Doing a 'clean build' gives no such warning.
> Gradle 8.0-rc-1 is already available, so we better get on this stuff...
>
> I changed the run.single parameters to add '--warning-mode all
> --stacktrace'
> to get more specific information:
>
> The JavaExec.main property has been deprecated. This is scheduled to be
> removed in Gradle 8.0. Please use the mainClass property instead. See
>
> https://docs.gradle.org/7.5/dsl/org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec.html#org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec:main
> for more details.
> at org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec.setMain(JavaExec.java:427)
> at org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec_Decorated.setMain(Unknown Source)
> at
>
> org.netbeans.modules.gradle.tooling.NetBeansRunSinglePlugin.lambda$addTask$2(NetBeansRunSinglePlugin.java:85)
>
> I filed issue #5267 
> and created pull-request #5268
> 
>
> Cheers,
>
> Scott
>

Prepare for more Gradle tweaks

[Scott Palmer]

I just noticed that the injected 'runSingle' task seems to provoke this
warning"

> Task :app:runSingle
Hello World!

Deprecated Gradle features were used in this build, making it incompatible
with Gradle 8.0.

That's running the Java file from NetBeans with Gradle 7.5 via the
Gradle Wrapper.  Doing a 'clean build' gives no such warning.
Gradle 8.0-rc-1 is already available, so we better get on this stuff...

I changed the run.single parameters to add '--warning-mode all --stacktrace'
to get more specific information:

The JavaExec.main property has been deprecated. This is scheduled to be
removed in Gradle 8.0. Please use the mainClass property instead. See
https://docs.gradle.org/7.5/dsl/org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec.html#org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec:main
for more details.
at org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec.setMain(JavaExec.java:427)
at org.gradle.api.tasks.JavaExec_Decorated.setMain(Unknown Source)
at
org.netbeans.modules.gradle.tooling.NetBeansRunSinglePlugin.lambda$addTask$2(NetBeansRunSinglePlugin.java:85)

I filed issue #5267 
and created pull-request #5268


Cheers,

Scott

Re: [NOTICE] - Freeze and branch for Apache NetBeans 17 on January 18th

[Neil C Smith]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2023, 20:37 Eric Bresie,  wrote:

> Is this based on 16-u1?
>

As Laszlo said it's based on master, as always.


Can I reiterate, please don't reply to notice emails! If you have a query,
please start a new thread.

Thanks,

Neil

.

>

Re: [NOTICE] - Freeze and branch for Apache NetBeans 17 on January 18th

[László Kishalmi]

No it's based on master. 16-u1 was a release with a few PRs backported over
NB16

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 12:37 PM Eric Bresie  wrote:

> Is this based on 16-u1?
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 8:21 AM Neil C Smith  wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > This is advance notice that we're intending to freeze and branch for
> > NetBeans 17 on January 18th.
> >
> > As we wind down towards NetBeans 17, please help with reviewing
> > remaining pending pull requests by January 17th.
> >
> > Please be release aware - merged PRs should be ready for release and
> > not require follow up.  If in doubt, push back to NB18.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/netbeans/milestone/20
> >
> > Also, please help with triaging issue reports, and mark with NB17
> > anything that might be high or critical priority for the release.
> >
> > We're intending to create the delivery and release branches on January
> > 18th.  All remaining open PRs will be retagged to NB18.  Anything that
> > requires merging to NetBeans 17 after that date should be opened /
> > rebased against delivery for review.
> >
> > A first release candidate should be available by January 19th, with
> > weekly release candidates until the release vote.
> >
> > Thanks all and best wishes,
> >
> > Neil
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
> >
> > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> Eric Bresie
> ebre...@gmail.com
>

Re: [NOTICE] - Freeze and branch for Apache NetBeans 17 on January 18th

[Eric Bresie]

Is this based on 16-u1?

On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 8:21 AM Neil C Smith  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> This is advance notice that we're intending to freeze and branch for
> NetBeans 17 on January 18th.
>
> As we wind down towards NetBeans 17, please help with reviewing
> remaining pending pull requests by January 17th.
>
> Please be release aware - merged PRs should be ready for release and
> not require follow up.  If in doubt, push back to NB18.
>
> https://github.com/apache/netbeans/milestone/20
>
> Also, please help with triaging issue reports, and mark with NB17
> anything that might be high or critical priority for the release.
>
> We're intending to create the delivery and release branches on January
> 18th.  All remaining open PRs will be retagged to NB18.  Anything that
> requires merging to NetBeans 17 after that date should be opened /
> rebased against delivery for review.
>
> A first release candidate should be available by January 19th, with
> weekly release candidates until the release vote.
>
> Thanks all and best wishes,
>
> Neil
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
> --
Eric Bresie
ebre...@gmail.com

Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[Eric Bresie]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 8:21 AM Michael Bien  wrote:

>
> The commit validation job is currently testing on 8, 11, 17 and 20-ea.
> It doesn't like NetBeans editor modules which require java 11 though
> which blocks a Jakarta EE 10 PR atm (#4692).
>
> This means we need either 1) a volunteer who would like to spend time
> and fix JDK 8 tests,


Any further details on the failures?

Is there an issue to track this work should someone step up?


-- 
Eric Bresie
ebre...@gmail.com

Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[László Kishalmi]

Well, I think we can remove the CV for Java 8.
Probably the only Java 8 thing we shall do is make sure that the platform
sources can be compiled and tested on Java 8.


On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 7:28 AM Michael Bien  wrote:

> On 10.01.23 16:25, Ernie Rael wrote:
> > On 23/01/10 6:16 AM, Michael Bien wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Given that NB doesn't really support running on JDK 11 since a while
> >> I would simply opt for 2) and merge.
> >>
> >>
> > Typo? JDK-11 --> JDK-8
>
> yes, thanks for spotting this!
>
> -mbien
>
> >
> > -ernie
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
>

NB Ant build guru wanted! Weird implementation versions, etc.

[Neil C Smith]

Hi.

OK, I'm working on fixing the problem we discovered during 16-u1 with
various NBMs getting an incorrect implementation version that differs
from the main build.  There are just over 90 of them.

To see what I mean, take a look at
https://netbeans-vm1.apache.org/uc/16/updates.xml

Search for "Netbeans/netbeans-TLP/netbeans/release160-11-on-20221119"
- each of those should be (like most of the rest, and in the main
release) - "16-321935444b183aea1c4ff255d8d2ab8d50c60606"

I have put in a PR that hopefully patches the version issue by making
sure the buildnumber is passed into the sub-ant task that builds the
NBMs.

https://github.com/apache/netbeans/pull/5262

But the underlying cause is that those 90+ modules seem to be
recompiled at that stage.  This is something to do with the classpath
in the uptodate check.   However, what I can't work out, is what all
those modules have in common, if anything, that is triggering the
rebuild.

It would be good to not rebuild those modules if not necessary.  It
would be really good to know that this isn't causing the main release
and NBM modules to be different in some way!

Issue also open at https://github.com/apache/netbeans/issues/5253

Thanks,

Neil

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[Michael Bien]

On 10.01.23 16:25, Ernie Rael wrote:

On 23/01/10 6:16 AM, Michael Bien wrote:



Given that NB doesn't really support running on JDK 11 since a while 
I would simply opt for 2) and merge.




Typo? JDK-11 --> JDK-8


yes, thanks for spotting this!

-mbien



-ernie



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.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.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[Ernie Rael]

On 23/01/10 6:16 AM, Michael Bien wrote:



Given that NB doesn't really support running on JDK 11 since a while I 
would simply opt for 2) and merge.




Typo? JDK-11 --> JDK-8

-ernie



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[Neil C Smith]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 at 14:21, Michael Bien  wrote:
> The commit validation job is currently testing on 8, 11, 17 and 20-ea.
> It doesn't like NetBeans editor modules which require java 11 though
> which blocks a Jakarta EE 10 PR atm (#4692).
>
> This means we need either 1) a volunteer who would like to spend time
> and fix JDK 8 tests, 2) we remove JDK 8 from the CV test matrix or 3) we
> won't be able to merge this pr before freeze.

IMO, we could possibly disable the JDK 8 commit validation
temporarily.  I think we might have a test issue here, that is not
specific to JDK 8, and will rear its head with higher Java
dependencies later anyway.

However, it's (more) likely the test failure is pointing out a valid
dependency misconfiguration in this PR given how it was agreed we'd
support higher Java versions, with optional enablement based on
OpenIDE-Module-Java-Dependencies.  Why does this PR fail but existing
modules don't?!

Maybe my suggestion on the PR was wrong about using
OpenIDE-Module-Recommends, at least by itself - the existing modules
with higher than JDK 8 requirements all use OpenIDE-Module-Provides to
enable them I believe?

Best wishes,

Neil

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition)

[Michael Bien]

Hello devs,

I hope everyone recovered from the last JDK 8 thread and is ready for 
the first JDK 8 thread of 2023 :)


The commit validation job is currently testing on 8, 11, 17 and 20-ea. 
It doesn't like NetBeans editor modules which require java 11 though 
which blocks a Jakarta EE 10 PR atm (#4692).


This means we need either 1) a volunteer who would like to spend time 
and fix JDK 8 tests, 2) we remove JDK 8 from the CV test matrix or 3) we 
won't be able to merge this pr before freeze.


Given that NB doesn't really support running on JDK 11 since a while I 
would simply opt for 2) and merge.


The problem is that I don't know the NB VSCode Extension situation very 
well.


Have the NB VSCode Extension specific tests (which run on JDK 8) 
sufficient coverage so that we can remove JDK 8 from the CV test matrix? 
At what point will JDK 11 modules become a problem for VSCode? When will 
the VSCode NB extension bump the runtime requirement to 11?


The next modules which would require JDK 11 are probably maven related 
(#4999) but this wouldn't be for NB 17.


best regards,

michael



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists

Re: Plugin Portal: Map Apache NetBeans project roles to pp3 roles

[Neil C Smith]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2023 at 17:00, Matthias Bläsing
 wrote:
> there were now multiple discussion about admin and verifier access to
> the plugin portal. To ease this, I have created this PR:
>
> https://github.com/apache/netbeans-tools/pull/60
>
> It will basicly map the two Apache NetBeans project roles to roles in
> the plugin portal:
>
> PMC members will automatically gain admin access
> Committer members will automatically gain verifier access
>
> It should be remembered, that PMC membership implies committer access,
> so all PMC members can automatically act as verifiers.
>
> The members need to login with the Apache OAuth login system and are
> then granted the corresponding permissions on the fly.

Fantastic!  Many thanks for looking at this.  Haven't looked at the
implementation, but principle is great.  That's how the permissions
should map, with or without this, in my opinion.  Automating it based
on Apache OAuth rather than requiring requests seems better and more
inline with other things.

We should perhaps have a general policy that no-one should verify
(review) their own plugins?

> The option to register separater admin/reviewer permissions is retained
> and there is a difference between an automatically mapped verifier and
> an explicitly registered verifier: Only the latter will get email
> notifications. The automatically mapped reviewers need to access the
> list of open verifications via the "Verification requests" menu entry.

Might be good to consider a way for people to opt in to those
notifications in future, if there isn't one?

Personally, I still have some reservations about having verifiers who
are not committers.  And only having admin / verifier access via the
Apache OAuth might be a good thing in future?

Best wishes,

Neil

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists