Came in late in the discussion so not sure what is presently in use for
Netbeans but figured I’d mention.
Looking at the Tomcat BUILDING.txt, the ant build script (see release target
for dependencies) it appears to use an open source installer (see
https://nsis.sourceforge.io/Main_Page ) as
>
>
> Do the sources of the installers matter, at all? What they are is a
> convenience binary, which is outside the scope of what Apache releases in
> the same way as a ZIP file.
>
>
For RCP based applications it sure does.
Hey all,
https://archive.apache.org/dist/tomcat/tomcat-9/v9.0.0.M1/bin/
Tomcat releases installers for Windows, somehow, let's follow however they
do that in terms of how to release it.
Gj
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:33 PM Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Yes, how
Yes, how do we get this resolved, ask our mentors or open a legal issue or
what do you suggest?
Gj
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 12:31, Neil C Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 11:18, Geertjan Wielenga
> wrote:
> >Surely
> > the sources of that installer themselves are not required to be part of
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 11:18, Geertjan Wielenga
wrote:
>Surely
> the sources of that installer themselves are not required to be part of the
> release too?
That (or a separately voted on source release / third-party
dependency) would exactly be my expectation, yes. IMO it should
always be
The key problem here is that there's nothing comparable in any other Apache
projects -- we can't refer to anything else and need to decide amongst
ourselves what to do here. The installer exists for no other purpose than
to install the binary of the sources that define the Apache release. Surely
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 10:28, Geertjan Wielenga
wrote:
> Do the sources of the installers matter, at all? What they are is a
> convenience binary, which is outside the scope of what Apache releases in
> the same way as a ZIP file.
Not trying to be awkward, but really don't see that parallel. An
Do the sources of the installers matter, at all? What they are is a
convenience binary, which is outside the scope of what Apache releases in
the same way as a ZIP file.
Gj
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 9:57 AM Neil C Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 08:38, Timon Veenstra wrote:
> > I would
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 08:38, Timon Veenstra wrote:
> I would say use the code to generate binaries from the voted release
> sources.
> Merge the PR after the release so the source code of the installer
> generation is included in the next release.
-1
I don't personally see how that meets the
+1
Gj
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 9:38 AM Timon Veenstra wrote:
> >
> > 1. Is this too late for inclusion in our official release? They haven't
> > been tried out as part of the NetCAT process, so should we wait to
> include
> > these not in the upcoming release, but in the release afterwards?
> >
>
> 1. Is this too late for inclusion in our official release? They haven't
> been tried out as part of the NetCAT process, so should we wait to include
> these not in the upcoming release, but in the release afterwards?
>
As the PR has not been merged, this piece of code hasn't been voted on
On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 12:36, Geertjan Wielenga
wrote:
> 2. Voting on releases is on source code only -- this would be a binary
> release like a ZIP file, would it even need to be voted on? And how would
> that vote be done?
As you say, voting is on source only. Are all the sources required to
On 3/12/19 5:35 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote:
Hi all,
Reema and others have put together installers for Windows and Linux:
https://builds.apache.org/job/netbeans-installer-test/
The questions are:
1. Is this too late for inclusion in our official release? They haven't
been tried out as part
Hi all,
Reema and others have put together installers for Windows and Linux:
https://builds.apache.org/job/netbeans-installer-test/
The questions are:
1. Is this too late for inclusion in our official release? They haven't
been tried out as part of the NetCAT process, so should we wait to
14 matches
Mail list logo
