Re: Status of Apache NetBeans 11.0 Release Blockers
Hi, On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 5:05 PM Laszlo Kishalmi wrote: > Dear all, > > We have still 3 open Blocker issues: > > NETBEANS-2160 Platform project runs with JDK 11.0.1 but not with JDK > 11.0.2 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-2160) > > Kind of interesting. This one seems to be the hardest of all. Though not > sure how much this is a blocking issue. > Based on the recent comments, might be enough to upgrade Apache Felix. I can try that if Jaroslav does not have time. > > NETBEANS-2126 Ant Web Application project - missing reference > javaee-endorsed-api-7.0 > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-2126) > > I do not know how much this counts as a blocker, I hope there is an easy > way to fix it. > Seems Matthias is looking at this. > NETBEANS-1819 Incorrect License Headers in Test Sources > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-1819) > > The NETBEANS-1819 could be an easy pick for anyone to take just requires > insert header into test files and make sure that the test still works > with the header. > Frankly, I think this may be the most laborious part. Inserting the license headers will almost surely trigger changes in the tests (but even if it did not, it will be necessary to *run* the tests and evaluate). Of course, someone can imagine some trick to do this without breaking all the tests, but still does not feel so easy. Frankly, I wonder why we are expected to do something like that, given: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions > Test data for which the addition of a source header would cause the tests to fail. Jan > There is a NETBEANS-168 issue in blocker state. I'm going to close that > issue, as it right now the black hole attracting almost all performance > issues we are having. There shall be new, more specific issues created > instead of this, with heapdumps and reproduction steps. > > So please focus on these as well as on the critical ones. > > > Thank you! Good Work! > > > - > 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 > > > >
Re: Status of Apache NetBeans 11.0 Release Blockers
I would say the first is not a blocker. Just use 11.02 or 8 or 12 or whatever. Add this to release notes (hey, we should have release notes). 2126 has been fixed I believe, one of the last two PRs with cherry pick marking that I merged. Gj On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 06:44, Laszlo Kishalmi wrote: > Any feedback on these? > > > On 3/6/19 8:05 AM, Laszlo Kishalmi wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > We have still 3 open Blocker issues: > > > > NETBEANS-2160 Platform project runs with JDK 11.0.1 but not with JDK > > 11.0.2 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-2160) > > > > Kind of interesting. This one seems to be the hardest of all. Though > > not sure how much this is a blocking issue. > > > > NETBEANS-2126 Ant Web Application project - missing reference > > javaee-endorsed-api-7.0 > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-2126) > > > > I do not know how much this counts as a blocker, I hope there is an > > easy way to fix it. > > > > NETBEANS-1819 Incorrect License Headers in Test Sources > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-1819) > > > > The NETBEANS-1819 could be an easy pick for anyone to take just > > requires insert header into test files and make sure that the test > > still works with the header. > > > > There is a NETBEANS-168 issue in blocker state. I'm going to close > > that issue, as it right now the black hole attracting almost all > > performance issues we are having. There shall be new, more specific > > issues created instead of this, with heapdumps and reproduction steps. > > > > So please focus on these as well as on the critical ones. > > > > > > Thank you! Good Work! > > > > - > 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 > > > >
Re: Status of Apache NetBeans 11.0 Release Blockers
Any feedback on these? On 3/6/19 8:05 AM, Laszlo Kishalmi wrote: Dear all, We have still 3 open Blocker issues: NETBEANS-2160 Platform project runs with JDK 11.0.1 but not with JDK 11.0.2 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-2160) Kind of interesting. This one seems to be the hardest of all. Though not sure how much this is a blocking issue. NETBEANS-2126 Ant Web Application project - missing reference javaee-endorsed-api-7.0 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-2126) I do not know how much this counts as a blocker, I hope there is an easy way to fix it. NETBEANS-1819 Incorrect License Headers in Test Sources (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-1819) The NETBEANS-1819 could be an easy pick for anyone to take just requires insert header into test files and make sure that the test still works with the header. There is a NETBEANS-168 issue in blocker state. I'm going to close that issue, as it right now the black hole attracting almost all performance issues we are having. There shall be new, more specific issues created instead of this, with heapdumps and reproduction steps. So please focus on these as well as on the critical ones. Thank you! Good Work! - 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
Re: Improve indexing and file indentification?
Just FYI: In NetBeans 11.0 we have removed the restrictive memory settings. On 3/8/19 9:53 AM, Lars Bruun-Hansen wrote: Regarding performance: In my experience part of the problem has been (historically) that the default -Xmx setting for NB IDE has simply been too low. People just don't go to etc/netbeans.conf on their own and change it. Anyway, when you compare the two IDEs remember to make sure they have been allocated exactly the same amount of memory. Do *not* compare out-of-the-box (no tweaking) performance. In short: Once I learned that I should always allocate memory handsomely to NB IDE I've never experienced problems with performance. I can't remember that I've had 50 projects open at the same time, but something like 40 for sure. No probs. This is not to say that NB IDE can't be improved in the performance area. Above is just my personal/anecdotal experience. /Lars On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:08 PM Jean-Marc Borer wrote: Hi guys, In the office we were comparing Netbeans to IntelliJ indexing performances and I have to admit that IntelliJ performs very well here (I was impressed). We had about 50 maven projects open at the same time. I wonder how IntelliJ reaches such performances. Another thing that could be improved in NB would be that when you look for symbols (CTRL+o), it should also propose file names. This is useful when you have config files or other assets in your project(s) that are not only contain code. Does this feature already exist in NB? Cheers, JMB - 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
Re: Improve indexing and file indentification?
Regarding performance: In my experience part of the problem has been (historically) that the default -Xmx setting for NB IDE has simply been too low. People just don't go to etc/netbeans.conf on their own and change it. Anyway, when you compare the two IDEs remember to make sure they have been allocated exactly the same amount of memory. Do *not* compare out-of-the-box (no tweaking) performance. In short: Once I learned that I should always allocate memory handsomely to NB IDE I've never experienced problems with performance. I can't remember that I've had 50 projects open at the same time, but something like 40 for sure. No probs. This is not to say that NB IDE can't be improved in the performance area. Above is just my personal/anecdotal experience. /Lars On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:08 PM Jean-Marc Borer wrote: > Hi guys, > > In the office we were comparing Netbeans to IntelliJ indexing performances > and I have to admit that IntelliJ performs very well here (I was > impressed). We had about 50 maven projects open at the same time. I wonder > how IntelliJ reaches such performances. > > Another thing that could be improved in NB would be that when you look for > symbols (CTRL+o), it should also propose file names. This is useful when > you have config files or other assets in your project(s) that are not only > contain code. Does this feature already exist in NB? > > Cheers, > > JMB >
Improve indexing and file indentification?
Hi guys, In the office we were comparing Netbeans to IntelliJ indexing performances and I have to admit that IntelliJ performs very well here (I was impressed). We had about 50 maven projects open at the same time. I wonder how IntelliJ reaches such performances. Another thing that could be improved in NB would be that when you look for symbols (CTRL+o), it should also propose file names. This is useful when you have config files or other assets in your project(s) that are not only contain code. Does this feature already exist in NB? Cheers, JMB
Re: [DISCUSS] Becoming a top level Apache project
On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, 11:23 Geertjan Wielenga, wrote: > Hope I got it right, Neil. If so, I like it! > Pretty much, yes. As one of those involved in the thread that brought up the idea of time-based quarterly releases I do feel a tiny twinge of guilt when we use it as a stick to beat ourselves with! :-) That thread had some good ideas from various people on how we might implement it and what might need to change. And there are lots of other projects doing it, including here at Apache, we could take a look at. It all came to mind again this morning while catching up on the release process. Best wishes, Neil >
Re: [DISCUSS] Becoming a top level Apache project
Hi, Slowly catching up on emails having been busy with some consultancy work the last month ... this still bothers me and feels like a fudge that needs addressing ... On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 16:27, Laszlo Kishalmi wrote: > I'm not sure, that I'm answering your question, though besides major > versions we are planning to have a major version every 6 months with an > optional minor release 3 months away from the major one. Previously we > tried to make a release in every 3 months, though we think that's > stretching our resources. Are we doing time-based releases or feature-based releases? The original time-based release proposal thread, from where the fixed cycle / 3-months came from, was based on having fixed-in-advance dates from freeze to release, keeping master releaseable, Jan (I think?) suggested fixed merge windows and keeping cherry-picking minimal, etc. It was about releasing quickly whatever was ready in master at a point in time. Having a tick-tock release cycle, or publicising features in advance before they're releaseable in master, seems to be very distinctly different from doing that? If we're saying that NB12 will contain X, and X is not ready in time, what actually would happen - delay NB12 or ship major feature X in NB12.1?! Best wishes, Neil - 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
