Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

I may allocate some time to fix this, but I don't know which ant task was used to build the source zip file. Is it "ant build-source-config" or "ant build-source-zips", or maybe we want another specific task for creating a release zip file? Thanks, Antonio On 12/01/18 23:52, Geertjan

Users first (was Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed)

Hi, My 2 cents: I agree with Geertjan: I think we should concentrate our efforts in the best NetBeans 9 we can build for users. There're many important things to do, ranging from the website to the jdk-javac branch. And many new tools to control, ranging from the wiki to the very slow JIRA

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

I see, thanks Matthias for identifying this. Maybe when we fix this, we should provide an rc2 with a new vote thread? Thanks, Gj On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:25 PM, Antonio wrote: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-276 > > > On 12/01/18 23:08, Antonio wrote: >>

Re: AW: Pull requests need to be reviewed

Hello, This whole discussion is valid (personally, I think all contributions should be considered, and I'm talking beyond the NB9 milestone), however nothing of this answers my former question. I was talking about coding style guidelines (no matter if we're fixing a bug, adding a new feature or

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-276 On 12/01/18 23:08, Antonio wrote: I'll open an issue@JIRA with the details. On 12/01/18 23:07, Antonio wrote: What Matthias is saying is that the contents of the zip file do not match github sources in tag 9.0-beta-rc1 You can verify this

Re: AW: Pull requests need to be reviewed

To add my 2¢ to this discussion: To make these ideas more concrete, in my view, the result of the current vote would be that at its closing a clearly marked branch is created that implicitly freezes the feature set. A voter, when submitting a vote can propose one or more PRs that should be

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

Hi Geertjan, Am Freitag, den 12.01.2018, 22:29 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga: > Can you be very very clear and concise about what is wrong here? What > does 'Nur in' mean and what exactly is the problem? > > Please don't respond with generated texts and so on -- just write down > what it is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

What Matthias is saying is that the contents of the zip file do not match github sources in tag 9.0-beta-rc1 You can verify this yourself like so: # Unzip the sources cd X X$ curl -O

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

Oops. The task that does the source build downloads (prepares) a handful of the external libraries and these are apparently not excluded when building the source zip :-(. On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Can you be very very clear

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

I tested the binary file. I created the following projects: - *a python project*: there were some errors, but the generated files were OK. I could not right-click and delete the python project though (delete menu item was disabled) - *a java project (anagrams)*: no problem - *a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

Can you be very very clear and concise about what is wrong here? What does 'Nur in' mean and what exactly is the problem? Please don't respond with generated texts and so on -- just write down what it is that is not what it should be or not be. Thanks, Gj On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:05 PM,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

Hey, my positive findings: The MD5 and SHA1 sums match the artifacts. The source zip builds cleanly on OpenJDK 8 (the one from Ubuntu artful). The resulting binary is a usable IDE. However the git tag is not identical with the contents of the source zip. That there is contents in the repository

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

Hi all, I tried it out in FreeBSD 11.1-RELEASE-p4 with "openjdk full version "1.8.0_152-b16"" and everything seems to be fine. I can build & run, install nb-javac, open projects, etc. Checksums are also correct. README, LICENSE, DISCLAIMER are perfect, but I like DEPENDENCIES better. Look at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:27 PM, Emilian Bold wrote: > I don't mean showing the nb-javac license before the installer. But the > plugins themselves (which right now I assume are in the Plugin Portal) > don't have the license included in the NBM. > Hum. The (uploaded)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

I don't mean showing the nb-javac license before the installer. But the plugins themselves (which right now I assume are in the Plugin Portal) don't have the license included in the NBM. --emi ​ > Original Message >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta

Re: DevFaq wiki update

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Neil C Smith wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 12:50 Bertrand Delacretaz >> MoinMoin is a standard offering indeed, https://wiki.apache.org > ...Or a standard no-longer offering according to that page! So, that rules

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Thilina Ranathunga > wrote: >> Performed following actions on source download from the link provided by Gj. >> create new window (TopComponent) in

Re: DevFaq wiki update

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 12:50 Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > MoinMoin is a standard offering indeed, https://wiki.apache.org > Or a standard no-longer offering according to that page! So, that rules that out anyway then. Thanks, Neil -- Neil C Smith Artist &

Re: DevFaq wiki update

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:01 PM, Neil C Smith wrote: > ...Emi mentioned the possibility of Apache infra providing MoinMoin for us > earlier, but perhaps we could open a discussion about the merits of a > git-backed wiki system via Apache?... MoinMoin is a standard

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Thilina Ranathunga wrote: > Performed following actions on source download from the link provided by Gj. > create new window (TopComponent) in above created module *PROBLEMATIC* > it displays the design. can work with palette. > In

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

Performed following actions on source download from the link provided by Gj. ant *OK* ant tryme *OK* install nb-javac using the prompt on launch *OK* create and run java application containing jframe form *OK* create netbeanse platform application *OK* add module to above created netbeanse

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:39 PM, Emilian Bold wrote: > There is no license for the nb-javac api / impl / library in the NetBeans > IDE installer. These plugins are also self signed (by Jan Lahoda); it would > be better for these specific plugins to either hardcode /

Re: DevFaq wiki update

Hi, On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 09:19 Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Ok, if you're going that route the mirroring should be checked with > ASF infra, ask on infrastructure@ > OK, I'll follow up on that. > Sure, but that content is "precious", I assume the project cannot >

Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed

On Friday, January 12, 2018, Christian Lenz wrote: > Hi, > > first, in my opinion each PR is welcome, why not cosmetic stuff too? There > is always a need to refactor code to make it more readable, maintainable > and sometimes or more often it makes stuff faster. So why

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc1

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 07:59 Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Please do note we are voting on one very specific artifact here. I.e., do > not git clone anything please. > Sorry. Confirmed that specific artifact does build and run on Windows 10/64-bit, so my original

AW: Pull requests need to be reviewed

If we are now at a Feature freeze, we should create a release/nb9 branch to make it clear, no new Features there and some documentation and so on. Everything else, so other PRs can still be handled in develop. Von: Geertjan Wielenga Gesendet: Freitag, 12. Januar 2018 11:41 An:

AW: Pull requests need to be reviewed

Hi, first, in my opinion each PR is welcome, why not cosmetic stuff too? There is always a need to refactor code to make it more readable, maintainable and sometimes or more often it makes stuff faster. So why not accepting everything? Yes I think we need guidelines too. Like „when do we need

Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed

Yup, makes sense to me, Neil. We need to make these things explicit and indeed will take a look at the related NetBeans processes, though I agree however we’re looking at it we are now at a stage of feature freeze and should incorporate bug fixes only, ideally as part of the NetCAT phase post Beta

Re: DevFaq wiki update

Hi Neil, On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Neil C Smith wrote: > ...Quite a few projects under > Apache have the wiki enabled (not sure on the mirroring situation)... Ok, if you're going that route the mirroring should be checked with ASF infra, ask on infrastructure@ >

Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 08:04 Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I think we need to set up guidelines — e.g., a PR must be connected to an > issue; a PR must solve a problem and not be cosmetic only; etc. > > I’d advise looking at pull/3 by Chris instead. > I like

Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed

I think we need to set up guidelines — e.g., a PR must be connected to an issue; a PR must solve a problem and not be cosmetic only; etc. I’d advise looking at pull/3 by Chris instead. Gj On Thursday, January 11, 2018, Charles Bedon wrote: > Hello all, > > I was