Re: [DISCUSS] NetBeans Transition Sequence

[Geertjan Wielenga]

The point is this -- during incubation, we're going to be working on
establishing whether Apache NetBeans can exist or not, from many different
points of view. And, even though we don't believe the process will fail, it
would be a problem if Oracle has granted the code to Apache only to find
that for some reason Apache NetBeans will not be able to leave the
incubator. Let's say, for example, there's a licensing problem that cannot
be fixed. If the software has already been granted, it would then need to
be 'ungranted' at that stage. That's my concern and why I think the code
should only be granted formally, i.e., via the formal SGA document, when we
know for sure that incubation will succeed.

That means that we can work on setting up the Git repo immediately and,
once we know what we want to move there, we move the source code there.
Then we start the process of 'scrubbing the code', i.e., checking its
licenses and noting any problems and seeking their solutions. Not sure how
long this will take, but maybe not too long, a month or so, just a
guesstimate. Once we have worked through the licensing, and we know for
sure incubation will succeed, we can get the SGA, if we know for sure there
will be no blockers. We did a preliminary investigation of this prior to
putting the proposal together, but at this point we'll have done a thorough
analysis.

Then, once we have the SGA, those who have signed the ICLAs can begin
working on committing code agreed upon by the project in terms of a
commonly drawn up roadmap. So, it's not a question of waiting until next
year sometime to start committing, just a question of waiting until we know
for 100% sure that the process will not have to be unwound before actually
having the code granted from Oracle.

Does the above make sense?

Gj


On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Emilian Bold 
wrote:

> Migrating the repository over to git and the code grant should happen in
> 2016.
>
> We have some momentum here but if I have to wait until Summer 2017 to
> commit using my @apache ID I signed the iCLA 6 months too soon.
>
> Also, it's a premature optimization to change too much the code repository.
> It seems like a juicy engineering task to split it up, filter it, whatever.
> But it is pointless.
>
> What's essential first is for work to be possible and to start on the git
> repo. We could have another goal during the incubation or even after
> incubation to split the repository.
>
> I don't think the unwinding should be your main concern. Code changes will
> have to be done regardless of who owns the IP.
>
> As an alternative to this Oracle concern, you could require contributors to
> have both an iCLA and an OCA, although perhaps the Apache iCLA might be
> sufficient. Apache Legal might intervene and explain things here...
>
> An incubating project must do a major release during incubation. I believe
> that release will have be the Java 9 release.
>
>
>
> --emi
>
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > An overview of the sequence as far as I understand it. Consider it a
> basic
> > starting point for discussion.
> >
> > Let's start by assuming we want there to be a NetBeans 9 to be released
> out
> > of Apache, and as a top level project, i.e., outside the incubator, in
> line
> > with the release of Java 9.
> >
> > That puts us in the middle of next year somewhere.
> >
> > The most important aspect that needs to be worked through before then is
> > the IP, license hygiene, etc. Before we get to the point where we're
> > working on that, we need to actually have one or more Mercurial repos
> that
> > we know we want to move. Right now, the NetBeans 9 branch is being moved
> > into trunk, once that's done we need to consider whether we should take
> the
> > NetBeans trunk as our starting point -- and determine other brances we'll
> > need.
> >
> > We'll then need to work through the IP issues, i.e., work through the
> > incompatible licenses and work out solutions for those. Some features
> might
> > be dropped, others can be installed via plugins, either separately or
> > during installation.
> >
> > At the point where we've worked through those licensing issues and are
> at a
> > stage where we either have temporary exceptions for truly problematic
> > areas, while knowing what the ultimate solutions for those will be, or we
> > have solved everything, we'll be at the point where Oracle's SGA
> (software
> > grant agreement) can be worked on.
> >
> > In other words, based on the above, the SGA would be executed as one of
> the
> > LAST steps of the incubation period. After all, if we do uncover
> > insurmountable issues during the incubation period, in particular in
> > relation to licensing, having executed such a grant too early would lead
> to
> > a very difficult unwinding of the process.
> >
> > In parallel to the licensing process described above, since we're
> confident

Re: [DISCUSS] NetBeans Transition Sequence

[Emilian Bold]

Migrating the repository over to git and the code grant should happen in
2016.

We have some momentum here but if I have to wait until Summer 2017 to
commit using my @apache ID I signed the iCLA 6 months too soon.

Also, it's a premature optimization to change too much the code repository.
It seems like a juicy engineering task to split it up, filter it, whatever.
But it is pointless.

What's essential first is for work to be possible and to start on the git
repo. We could have another goal during the incubation or even after
incubation to split the repository.

I don't think the unwinding should be your main concern. Code changes will
have to be done regardless of who owns the IP.

As an alternative to this Oracle concern, you could require contributors to
have both an iCLA and an OCA, although perhaps the Apache iCLA might be
sufficient. Apache Legal might intervene and explain things here...

An incubating project must do a major release during incubation. I believe
that release will have be the Java 9 release.



--emi

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> An overview of the sequence as far as I understand it. Consider it a basic
> starting point for discussion.
>
> Let's start by assuming we want there to be a NetBeans 9 to be released out
> of Apache, and as a top level project, i.e., outside the incubator, in line
> with the release of Java 9.
>
> That puts us in the middle of next year somewhere.
>
> The most important aspect that needs to be worked through before then is
> the IP, license hygiene, etc. Before we get to the point where we're
> working on that, we need to actually have one or more Mercurial repos that
> we know we want to move. Right now, the NetBeans 9 branch is being moved
> into trunk, once that's done we need to consider whether we should take the
> NetBeans trunk as our starting point -- and determine other brances we'll
> need.
>
> We'll then need to work through the IP issues, i.e., work through the
> incompatible licenses and work out solutions for those. Some features might
> be dropped, others can be installed via plugins, either separately or
> during installation.
>
> At the point where we've worked through those licensing issues and are at a
> stage where we either have temporary exceptions for truly problematic
> areas, while knowing what the ultimate solutions for those will be, or we
> have solved everything, we'll be at the point where Oracle's SGA (software
> grant agreement) can be worked on.
>
> In other words, based on the above, the SGA would be executed as one of the
> LAST steps of the incubation period. After all, if we do uncover
> insurmountable issues during the incubation period, in particular in
> relation to licensing, having executed such a grant too early would lead to
> a very difficult unwinding of the process.
>
> In parallel to the licensing process described above, since we're confident
> that in one way or another things will work out favorably, we could decide
> to move the tutorials and other content from netbeans.org to the website
> structure, whatever that will be, at Apache, including setting up a Wiki
> structure in our new Confluence environment.
>
> Comments to the above -- bring 'em on!
>
> Gj
>

Re: [DISCUSS] NetBeans Transition Sequence

[Craig Russell]

I just re-read the OCA that all contributors to NetBeans has to sign in order 
for their contribution to be accepted. 
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf

It is very different from the Apache ICLA. It grants joint ownership to Oracle 
and the contributor, including licensing rights through multiple levels of 
license.

So I’d say that Oracle has the right to donate any code that they have, whether 
created by Oracle employees or by contributors who signed the OCA.

And with the assurance that Oracle will in fact sign and submit a CCLA that 
covers their interest in NetBeans code, patches, documentation, tutorials, 
graphics, specifications, and manuals (this list is from the OCA): we don’t 
need an exhaustive list of files. 

So I don’t think we need to hold up analyzing and moving over stuff from the 
repositories that are controlled by Oracle. Any contribution made between now 
and when the repository officially changes to Apache will be covered by the 
OCA. And any contribution made after the move will be covered by the Apache 
CCLA/ICLA.

It would be good to know from Oracle whether they intend to contribute 
everything they control.

Then our job is to identify things that are now in other repositories and/or 
are dynamically linked to the code that Oracle controls. 

Craig

> On Oct 10, 2016, at 2:49 PM, Raphael Bircher  wrote:
> 
> Hi Geertjan
> 
> 
> Am 10/10/2016 um 11:18 PM schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> An overview of the sequence as far as I understand it. Consider it a basic
>> starting point for discussion.
>> 
>> Let's start by assuming we want there to be a NetBeans 9 to be released out
>> of Apache, and as a top level project, i.e., outside the incubator, in line
>> with the release of Java 9.
>> 
>> That puts us in the middle of next year somewhere.
>> 
>> The most important aspect that needs to be worked through before then is
>> the IP, license hygiene, etc. Before we get to the point where we're
>> working on that, we need to actually have one or more Mercurial repos that
>> we know we want to move. Right now, the NetBeans 9 branch is being moved
>> into trunk, once that's done we need to consider whether we should take the
>> NetBeans trunk as our starting point -- and determine other brances we'll
>> need.
>> 
>> We'll then need to work through the IP issues, i.e., work through the
>> incompatible licenses and work out solutions for those. Some features might
>> be dropped, others can be installed via plugins, either separately or
>> during installation.
>> 
>> At the point where we've worked through those licensing issues and are at a
>> stage where we either have temporary exceptions for truly problematic
>> areas, while knowing what the ultimate solutions for those will be, or we
>> have solved everything, we'll be at the point where Oracle's SGA (software
>> grant agreement) can be worked on.
>> 
>> In other words, based on the above, the SGA would be executed as one of the
>> LAST steps of the incubation period. After all, if we do uncover
>> insurmountable issues during the incubation period, in particular in
>> relation to licensing, having executed such a grant too early would lead to
>> a very difficult unwinding of the process.
> I see it differently. Oracle has to singn the SGA first. Or do you think, we 
> smell which file Oracle owns the Copyright, and which one not? ;-) Normaly we 
> get a list of files which are granted. I think, this is very important and 
> should be one of the first step. But maybe you can describe your problem a 
> bit closer.
> 
> Regards
> Raphael

Craig L Russell
Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo

Re: [DISCUSS] NetBeans Transition Sequence

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi Geertjan


Am 10/10/2016 um 11:18 PM schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:

Hi all,

An overview of the sequence as far as I understand it. Consider it a basic
starting point for discussion.

Let's start by assuming we want there to be a NetBeans 9 to be released out
of Apache, and as a top level project, i.e., outside the incubator, in line
with the release of Java 9.

That puts us in the middle of next year somewhere.

The most important aspect that needs to be worked through before then is
the IP, license hygiene, etc. Before we get to the point where we're
working on that, we need to actually have one or more Mercurial repos that
we know we want to move. Right now, the NetBeans 9 branch is being moved
into trunk, once that's done we need to consider whether we should take the
NetBeans trunk as our starting point -- and determine other brances we'll
need.

We'll then need to work through the IP issues, i.e., work through the
incompatible licenses and work out solutions for those. Some features might
be dropped, others can be installed via plugins, either separately or
during installation.

At the point where we've worked through those licensing issues and are at a
stage where we either have temporary exceptions for truly problematic
areas, while knowing what the ultimate solutions for those will be, or we
have solved everything, we'll be at the point where Oracle's SGA (software
grant agreement) can be worked on.

In other words, based on the above, the SGA would be executed as one of the
LAST steps of the incubation period. After all, if we do uncover
insurmountable issues during the incubation period, in particular in
relation to licensing, having executed such a grant too early would lead to
a very difficult unwinding of the process.
I see it differently. Oracle has to singn the SGA first. Or do you 
think, we smell which file Oracle owns the Copyright, and which one not? 
;-) Normaly we get a list of files which are granted. I think, this is 
very important and should be one of the first step. But maybe you can 
describe your problem a bit closer.


Regards
Raphael

[DISCUSS] NetBeans Transition Sequence

[Geertjan Wielenga]

Hi all,

An overview of the sequence as far as I understand it. Consider it a basic
starting point for discussion.

Let's start by assuming we want there to be a NetBeans 9 to be released out
of Apache, and as a top level project, i.e., outside the incubator, in line
with the release of Java 9.

That puts us in the middle of next year somewhere.

The most important aspect that needs to be worked through before then is
the IP, license hygiene, etc. Before we get to the point where we're
working on that, we need to actually have one or more Mercurial repos that
we know we want to move. Right now, the NetBeans 9 branch is being moved
into trunk, once that's done we need to consider whether we should take the
NetBeans trunk as our starting point -- and determine other brances we'll
need.

We'll then need to work through the IP issues, i.e., work through the
incompatible licenses and work out solutions for those. Some features might
be dropped, others can be installed via plugins, either separately or
during installation.

At the point where we've worked through those licensing issues and are at a
stage where we either have temporary exceptions for truly problematic
areas, while knowing what the ultimate solutions for those will be, or we
have solved everything, we'll be at the point where Oracle's SGA (software
grant agreement) can be worked on.

In other words, based on the above, the SGA would be executed as one of the
LAST steps of the incubation period. After all, if we do uncover
insurmountable issues during the incubation period, in particular in
relation to licensing, having executed such a grant too early would lead to
a very difficult unwinding of the process.

In parallel to the licensing process described above, since we're confident
that in one way or another things will work out favorably, we could decide
to move the tutorials and other content from netbeans.org to the website
structure, whatever that will be, at Apache, including setting up a Wiki
structure in our new Confluence environment.

Comments to the above -- bring 'em on!

Gj

Re: Wiki is ready, please ask for access

[Geertjan Wielenga]

jtulach is not recognized on Confluence, can you check?

Gj

On Monday, October 10, 2016, Jaroslav Tulach 
wrote:

> +1 my username is jtulach
> Thanks.
> -jt
>
>
> 2016-10-10 21:55 GMT+02:00 Jan Lahoda >:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can I please get access? My username is jlahoda.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jan
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 7:10 PM, John McDonnell <
> mcdonnell.j...@gmail.com >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Confluence username is mcdonnell.john
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > > On 10 Oct 2016, at 17:47, David Heffelfinger <
> dheffelfin...@gmail.com >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Apologies, it should work now.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> > > > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:33 PM, David Heffelfinger wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I would like write access: dheffelfinger
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> That's not recognized on Confluence, can you check?
> > > >>
> > > >> Gj
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:33 PM, David Heffelfinger <
> > > >> dheffelfin...@gmail.com > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I would like write access: dheffelfinger
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > > >>> bdelacre...@apache.org 
> > >  wrote:
> > > >>>
> > >  Hi,
> > > 
> > >  http://cwiki.apache.org/NETBEANS has been created, if you need
> > write
> > >  access please ask here indicating your Confluence username.
> > > 
> > >  You need to create a distinct user there as Confluence isn't
> hooked
> > to
> > >  up the ASF's LDAP service - if possible use the same username as
> > your
> > >  Apache ID.
> > > 
> > >  -Bertrand
> > > 
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> http://ensode.net - A Guide to Java, Linux and Other Technology
> > Topics
> > > >>> My Books: http://www.packtpub.com/authors/profiles/david-
> > heffelfinger
> > > >>> My Video Training:
> > > >>> http://www.packtpub.com/java-ee-development-with-netbeans-7/video
> > > >>> Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ensode
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://ensode.net - A Guide to Java, Linux and Other Technology
> Topics
> > > > My Books: http://www.packtpub.com/authors/profiles/david-
> heffelfinger
> > > > My Video Training:
> > > > http://www.packtpub.com/java-ee-development-with-netbeans-7/video
> > > > Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ensode
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Wiki name capitalisation

[Geertjan Wielenga]

Nice! Suddenly the whole page looks even better. :-)

Gj

On Monday, October 10, 2016, Bertrand Delacretaz 
wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Hermien Pellissier  > wrote:
> > I had a quick look at the new Wiki at http://cwiki.apache.org/NETBEANS
> > and I noticed that the name displayed top left on the page is Netbeans
> > (lower case B)...
>
> Should be fixed now.
> -Bertrand
>

Re: Wiki name capitalisation

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Hermien Pellissier  wrote:
> I had a quick look at the new Wiki at http://cwiki.apache.org/NETBEANS
> and I noticed that the name displayed top left on the page is Netbeans
> (lower case B)...

Should be fixed now.
-Bertrand

Re: Wiki is ready, please ask for access

[Geertjan Wielenga]

Confluence username: geertjan

Gj

On Monday, October 10, 2016, Bertrand Delacretaz 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/NETBEANS has been created, if you need write
> access please ask here indicating your Confluence username.
>
> You need to create a distinct user there as Confluence isn't hooked to
> up the ASF's LDAP service - if possible use the same username as your
> Apache ID.
>
> -Bertrand
>