+1(binding)
Tested on Linux box with jdk-1.8.0_202-b08
Regards,
Arunava Sinha
On 6/2/2020 2:32 AM, John Kostaras wrote:
+1 (binding)
Downloaded the binary and ran it on two configurations:
Oracle JDK8u221
Oracle JDK14
both on a Mac High Sierra.
Was able to specify that I did not want to
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 2:09 AM Tomas Poledny wrote:
> My proposal is to create a checkbox in settings (and per project too) with
> enabling license headers.
FYI, if you use Maven, NetBeans does the right thing automatically:
looks for the license declaration in your POM, and picks a license
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 2:59 PM Tim Boudreau wrote:
> It seems pretty clear that NetBeans is doing this - but what? And why?
I think this is from
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020, 22:49 Glenn Holmer, wrote:
> > Out of interest, how did you build - ant or ant build? And how did you
> run
> > it after build? From the zip?
>
> ant -Dpermit.jdk9.builds=true
> nbbuild/netbeans/bin/netbeans
>
I would recommend using ant build and then extracting the zip to
On 6/1/20 3:56 PM, Neil C Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2020, 21:49 Glenn Holmer, wrote:
>
>> Just as I described. I tried it again just now, and got the "JavaFX
>> Implementation for Windows" prompt, as Matthias reported. Interestingly,
>> when I used the convenience binary instead of the build
+1 (binding)
Downloaded the binary and ran it on two configurations:
Oracle JDK8u221
Oracle JDK14
both on a Mac High Sierra.
Was able to specify that I did not want to install nb-javac and the JavaFX
implementation.
Tested various standalone java, platform, maven, web and JavaFX
applications.
+1 (binding)
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 21:49, Glenn Holmer
wrote:
> On 5/31/20 7:13 AM, Eric Barboni wrote:
> > This is our first voting candidate for the 12.0 LTS release of Apache
> > NetBeans.
> > Note that this is our first release vote where you are required to check
> > both sources and
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020, 21:49 Glenn Holmer, wrote:
> Just as I described. I tried it again just now, and got the "JavaFX
> Implementation for Windows" prompt, as Matthias reported. Interestingly,
> when I used the convenience binary instead of the build from source, it
> correctly said "Linux".
>
On 5/31/20 7:13 AM, Eric Barboni wrote:
> This is our first voting candidate for the 12.0 LTS release of Apache
> NetBeans.
> Note that this is our first release vote where you are required to check
> both sources and convenience binaries before voting!
+1 (binding)
Downloaded binary and source
On 6/1/20 2:44 PM, Neil C Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2020, 20:14 Glenn Holmer, wrote:
>
>> I posted this in the voting thread (mea culpa). Can anybody reproduce
>> it? Is it a concern? Otherwise, I'll go ahead with my +1.
>>
> Yes, and no. Matthias mentioned it here. It should be just a
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020, 20:14 Glenn Holmer, wrote:
> I posted this in the voting thread (mea culpa). Can anybody reproduce
> it? Is it a concern? Otherwise, I'll go ahead with my +1.
>
Yes, and no. Matthias mentioned it here. It should be just a cosmetic issue
in that the right thing will install,
I didn't see that problem myself and wouldn't think it a blocker if I did.
:-)
Gj
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:14 PM Glenn Holmer
wrote:
> I posted this in the voting thread (mea culpa). Can anybody reproduce
> it? Is it a concern? Otherwise, I'll go ahead with my +1.
>
> > 1) built from source
I posted this in the voting thread (mea culpa). Can anybody reproduce
it? Is it a concern? Otherwise, I'll go ahead with my +1.
> 1) built from source under Linux (Debian 10 "Buster")
> 2) started with fresh userdir
> 3) created a new FX project: "FXML JavaFX Maven Archetype (Gluon)"
>
>
+1 (binding)
Started by downloading the convenience binary, ran it on the following
configuration:
openjdk version "14" 2020-03-17
OpenJDK Runtime Environment Zulu14.27+1-CA (build 14+36)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM Zulu14.27+1-CA (build 14+36, mixed mode, sharing)
Was able to specify that I did
Another (mostly retired) professor here.
We had a team project (https://github.com/dgreen/NetBeansTemplateConfig) at
the end of the course and one of the groups built a limited template tool
(for our environment) that sets up the students machine for the course
standard header for most of the
+1 (binding)
based on the NetCAT 12.0 approval:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Results+from+Apache+NetBeans+IDE+12.0+Community+Acceptance+survey
plus I am super excited that NetBeans 12.0 features integration with the
brand new Plugin Portal 3.0!
-Jirka
Dne 31. 05. 20
+1 (binding)
It does seem to work to some extent.
-jt
po 1. 6. 2020 v 15:48 odesílatel Neil C Smith
napsal:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Checked sigs, hashes and rat.
> Built with OpenJDK 8 and ant 1.10.5 on Ubuntu 18.04
> Tried running built source and binaries on OpenJDK 8, 11 and 14
> Tested with
>From me a strong -1 to split the configuration. What do we gain if we
have a checkbox and the configuration of the text at another place? I'm
sure some usability study will tell me it is right, but for me it is
the oposite.
Am Montag, den 01.06.2020, 14:32 + schrieb Kenneth Fogel:
> I think
I think Tomas' suggestion below makes the most sense. If the community feels
strongly that licenses must be encouraged then it could be reduced to a single
line such as :
// Consider creating a Licence header in Project Properties or Tools Templates.
Ken
-Original Message-
From:
+1 to the idea of a hint on the first line that links to the default license
template if the file does not start with a comment.
We also need per-project templates and perhaps improvements to the default
template. I always figured the default should insert a copyright notice with
the current
+1 (binding)
Checked sigs, hashes and rat.
Built with OpenJDK 8 and ant 1.10.5 on Ubuntu 18.04
Tried running built source and binaries on OpenJDK 8, 11 and 14
Tested with some Maven and Gradle projects.
Also checked and built platform source zip (other than fact we really
should change that
Also sent it to annou...@apache.org.
I'll wait a few hours for any comments anyone has on the text, which is a
bit of a mosaic of the comments throughout this thread -- mostly by Eric
Costlow, many thanks! -- and will then tweet this, etc.
Gj
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 1:27 PM Geertjan Wielenga
https://blogs.apache.org/netbeans/entry/newly-identified-inactive-malware-campaign
There it is!
Gj
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 11:55 AM Sally Khudairi wrote:
> Thank you, Geertjan; hello, everyone.
>
> Great work --I first noticed what had happened from Emilian's, followed by
> your, tweets
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 10:58, Zoran Sevarac wrote:
> In addition to suggested solutions, maybe it could be handy to have
> EducationalMode plugin which will provide all the settings suitable for
> teaching out of the box.
+1 This I've said multiple times - something that could control
selective
Obviously, there are different needs/perspectives for professional
developers and students.
In addition to suggested solutions, maybe it could be handy to have
EducationalMode plugin which will provide all the settings suitable for
teaching out of the box.
Although it is possible to do it
Thank you, Geertjan; hello, everyone.
Great work --I first noticed what had happened from Emilian's, followed by
your, tweets yesterday. I see that quite a few articles are out on this Octopus
Scanner campaign.
Rapid response is essential to avoid further confusion/miscommunication, so
great
ne 31. 5. 2020 v 19:00 odesílatel Matthias Bläsing <
mblaes...@doppel-helix.eu> napsal:
> Hi,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 31.05.2020, 16:37 + schrieb Kenneth Fogel:
> > Please, please, please get rid of this:
> >
> > /*
> > * To change this license header, choose License Headers in Project
>
Feel free to copy my text ideas, make it less personal and republish where
appropriate.
-jt
po 1. 6. 2020 v 10:33 odesílatel Neil C Smith
napsal:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 08:30, Jaroslav Tulach
> wrote:
> > My personal take on the malware situation is available at
> >
Yes, agree with that — I think we should take Eric’s rewrite of my
proposal, link to the report and also link to Jaroslav’s blog entry.
Gj
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 10:33, Neil C Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 08:30, Jaroslav Tulach
> wrote:
> > My personal take on the malware situation is
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 08:30, Jaroslav Tulach wrote:
> My personal take on the malware situation is available at
> http://wiki.apidesign.org/wiki/Malware
You have a talent for better saying what I'm thinking! :-)
I don't know whether we or you would be happy with reblogging that
from here, or
On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 09:06, Christian Lenz wrote:
> +1 for the hint mentioned by Jan and +1 for the checkbox mentioned by Tomas.
+1 to the hint mentioned by Jan, was thinking similar.
-1 to the checkbox, at least if it's off by default. I mainly agree
with Matthias' stance. Hiding things
+1 for the hint mentioned by Jan and +1 for the checkbox mentioned by Tomas.
Gesendet von Mail für Windows 10
Von: Tomas Poledny
Gesendet: Montag, 1. Juni 2020 08:09
An: dev@netbeans.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Default license header in generated files confuses students
(was:Re: The time has come
My personal take on the malware situation is available at
http://wiki.apidesign.org/wiki/Malware
-jt
ne 31. 5. 2020 v 19:08 odesílatel Geertjan Wielenga
napsal:
> Hi all,
>
> I propose we publish the following on the Apache NetBeans blog re the
> recent announcement by GitHub researchers of
Hi Sally,
We propose putting the below on the Apache NetBeans blog re the GitHub
malware report on the inactive malware campaign.
To everyone else — Sally is VP Marketing and Publicity at Apache.
Thanks, and thanks Eric for your rewrite of the text.
Gj
On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 22:39, Erik
My proposal is to create a checkbox in settings (and per project too) with
enabling license headers. It can be disabled by default and if you want
license headers (because you know what you are doing) you can easily enable
it in settings.
Tomas
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 7:35 AM Jan Lahoda wrote:
35 matches
Mail list logo
