Planning to remove rosters from active podlings

2017-09-25 Thread John D. Ament 
All,

This coming weekend (9/29) I plan to remove the roster sections from all
podling status pages.

Podling rosters are meant to be managed in Whimsy.  The roster in the
status page is redundant and end up out of sync.  In place of the roster, I
will be adding a link automatically to all podling rosters.

John

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #8: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.htmlui

2017-09-25 Thread emilianbold 
Github user emilianbold commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/8
  
@asfgit who are you?


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #2: Allow custom authenticator

2017-09-25 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/2
  
Can one of the admins verify this patch?


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #8: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.htmlui

2017-09-25 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/8
  
Can one of the admins verify this patch?


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #6: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review db

2017-09-25 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/6
  
Can one of the admins verify this patch?


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #3: NETBEANS-59 - Document split actions

2017-09-25 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/3
  
Can one of the admins verify this patch?


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #7: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.annotations.com...

2017-09-25 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/7
  
Can one of the admins verify this patch?


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans pull request #8: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.htmlui

2017-09-25 Thread jlahoda 
GitHub user jlahoda opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/8

[NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.htmlui

-no external library

-checked Rat report: no license of manifest and signature file (see central 
problems); unconverted license in 
api.htmlui/src/org/netbeans/api/htmlui/HTMLDialog.java (misplaced /*\n, so the 
tool, being strict, refused to convert it. After deleting the '/*\n', the tool 
was happy to convert the header).

-skimmed through the module, did not notice additional problems

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/jlahoda/incubator-netbeans api.htmlui-review2

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/8.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #8


commit 5becc129a2753d62ca6b787cb34f85b380d260c7
Author: Jan Lahoda 
Date:   2017-09-24T06:20:19Z

[NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.htmlui
-no external library

-checked Rat report: no license of manifest and signature file (see central 
problems); unconverted license in 
api.htmlui/src/org/netbeans/api/htmlui/HTMLDialog.java (misplaced /*\n, so the 
tool, being strict, refused to convert it. After deleting the '/*\n', the tool 
was happy to convert the header).

-skimmed through the module, did not notice additional problems




---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans pull request #6: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review db

2017-09-25 Thread matthiasblaesing 
Github user matthiasblaesing commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/6#discussion_r140854981
  
--- Diff: 
db/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/db/explorer/DbDriverManagerTest.java ---
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ private static JDBCDriver createJDBCDriver() {
 
 private static JDBCDriver createDummyJDBCDriver(File dataDir) throws 
MalformedURLException {
 URL url = dataDir.toURL();
-return JDBCDriver.create("test_driver", "DbDriverManagerTest 
DummyDriver", "DummyDriver", new URL[] { url });
+return JDBCDriver.create("test_driver", "DbDriverManagerTest 
DummyDriver", 
"org.netbeans.modules.db.explorer.DbDriverManagerTest$DriverImpl", new URL[] { 
url });
--- End diff --

It is related, as I run unittests and they failed. This was necessary to 
let them cleanly again. This is related to the change in the binaries-list, as 
the binaries are used by the unittests.


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans pull request #6: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review db

2017-09-25 Thread matthiasblaesing 
Github user matthiasblaesing commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/6#discussion_r140853623
  
--- Diff: db/external/binaries-list ---
@@ -1,2 +1,18 @@
-F787C9B484CD7526F866C21D8925C4DACE467F8A derby-10.2.2.0.jar
-97771BE04E7452FC197EB875D2591A7E91F274D0 derby-10.2.2.0.zip
--- End diff --

I did not find any usage and as such I removed that reference.


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans pull request #6: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review db

2017-09-25 Thread jlahoda 
Github user jlahoda commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/6#discussion_r140850999
  
--- Diff: 
db/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/db/explorer/DbDriverManagerTest.java ---
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ private static JDBCDriver createJDBCDriver() {
 
 private static JDBCDriver createDummyJDBCDriver(File dataDir) throws 
MalformedURLException {
 URL url = dataDir.toURL();
-return JDBCDriver.create("test_driver", "DbDriverManagerTest 
DummyDriver", "DummyDriver", new URL[] { url });
+return JDBCDriver.create("test_driver", "DbDriverManagerTest 
DummyDriver", 
"org.netbeans.modules.db.explorer.DbDriverManagerTest$DriverImpl", new URL[] { 
url });
--- End diff --

So what is the significance of this change? (If it is unrelated to 
"license" review, then I'd suggest to send it separately, for clarity.)


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans pull request #6: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review db

2017-09-25 Thread jlahoda 
Github user jlahoda commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/6#discussion_r140850184
  
--- Diff: db/external/binaries-list ---
@@ -1,2 +1,18 @@
-F787C9B484CD7526F866C21D8925C4DACE467F8A derby-10.2.2.0.jar
-97771BE04E7452FC197EB875D2591A7E91F274D0 derby-10.2.2.0.zip
--- End diff --

The zip is unused, right? (I did a quick search, and didn't find a place 
where it would be used.)


---

[mentors] Review of Modules Review

2017-09-25 Thread Geertjan Wielenga 
Hi Mentors,

Just want to make sure everyone is on the same page and that the outcome
from the Modules Review that we're now going through as part of the Apache
NetBeans (incubating) release process will be agreed upon by everyone.

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/List+of+Modules+to+Review

>From the "Modules review" thread started by Jan Lahoda:

mentors and others: does this seem like a good approach? Could you please
> take a look at the page, comments for api.htmlui, libs.felix and libs.jna
> and the three "pilot" commits (marked as "For review." in the wiki page) to
> see if those look OK?


Thanks,

Geertjan

Re: Additional Rat excludes -- files without any degree of creativity

2017-09-25 Thread Emilian Bold 
Correct.

Really makes no sense to add copyright headers to META-INF/ files.
Some are autogenerated but the manually created ones have only a few
lines pointing to a classname.

binaries-list is also obvious.

--emi


On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
 wrote:
> When these are added to the exclusions:
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> ...the Rat report lists 6540 problematic files, instead of 9164, which is
> the current number.
>
> Gj
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Following on from the additional Rat excludes by jlahoda:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/4
>>
>> I'd like to propose several others be excluded via Rat, since these are
>> IMHO files "without any degree of creativity" (
>> https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html) and thus do not require a
>> license header:
>>
>> - .list files
>> - META-INF/services files
>> - .pass files
>> - binaries-list files
>>
>> The above are all documented here with the question whether they have any
>> degree of creativity:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
>> NetBeans+Transition+Process
>>
>> They're all simple registration files of one type or another and do not
>> qualify IMHO as having any degree of creativity.
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gj
>>

Re: Additional Rat excludes -- files without any degree of creativity

2017-09-25 Thread Geertjan Wielenga 
When these are added to the exclusions:







...the Rat report lists 6540 problematic files, instead of 9164, which is
the current number.

Gj

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Following on from the additional Rat excludes by jlahoda:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/4
>
> I'd like to propose several others be excluded via Rat, since these are
> IMHO files "without any degree of creativity" (
> https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html) and thus do not require a
> license header:
>
> - .list files
> - META-INF/services files
> - .pass files
> - binaries-list files
>
> The above are all documented here with the question whether they have any
> degree of creativity:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> NetBeans+Transition+Process
>
> They're all simple registration files of one type or another and do not
> qualify IMHO as having any degree of creativity.
>
> Comments?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gj
>

Re: I say bye bye on this list

2017-09-25 Thread Geertjan Wielenga 
Thanks and bye!

Gj

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Raphael Bircher 
wrote:

> Hi all
>
> I have to say bye bye here. I never did real work for NetBeans and I have
> a new Project and less time. I don't have planes to do something on
> NetBeans and the ML Traffic increases here. So I left before my mail
> account explode ;-)
>
> For my perspective, NetBeans does well and I have no worry that you will
> find the way though the incubator. There are other projects who need my
> help more :)
>
> Thanks for the Time here and keep up your good work! And if you need me,
> you can write me a PM.
>
> Regards Raphael
>
> --
> My introduction https://youtu.be/Ln4vly5sxYU
>

Re: To branch or to fork.

2017-09-25 Thread Daniel Gruno 
On 09/25/2017 11:24 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote:
> I would prefer this approach too, also since we're working in this way
> naturally already, however I have seen "Can't you do that in a branch of
> the ASF repository instead? It's better IMO if things stay here.” from
> Bertrand, one of our mentors. Hoping there'll be clarity on this point from
> our mentors via this thread.

You are really free to do as you please there. Typically, once you have
the commit bit to the ASF repo, you'll wanna work on branches on that
repo, so you can collaborate on changes with others, but for drive-by
commits, forking is acceptable. However, do note that if you merge from
a fork via a PR, GitHub does some weird magic where it silently inserts
the changes into our repo and then merges it. This messes up the diffs
you get to the mailing list (they'll appear as having already been
committed to the repo before the merge in some cases), which means
you'll risk getting a merge summary but no diff on the mailing list. So
I'd recommend that _committers_ at least work off the main repo.

With regards,
Daniel.

> 
> Gj
> 
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Matthias Bläsing > wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am Montag, den 25.09.2017, 01:05 +0200 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>>> See:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Git+workflow+for+in
>>> frastructure-puppet+repo
>>>
>>> Gj
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
>> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
 The Apache Way is to branch, rather than fork -- the idea being
 that via
 branches, the code stays at Apache, rather than being somewhere
 else, i.e.,
 in someone else's Git repo.

 From the branch, reviews are done, prior to merging.
>>
>> The means everybody that wants code merged needs write access to the
>> netbeans git repository.
>>
>> I don't see any benefit here. The normal github way is:
>>
>>  * fork the project
>>  * create a working branch for your changeset from the development
>>branch/target branch and name it matching your intention
>>  * do your changes
>>  * create a PR (on github via their system, in other environment via
>>Email), which details your changes
>>
>> Now this PR is reviewed:
>>
>>  * Has the author an ICLA on file @apache (this might be
>>interesting...)
>>  * Are the changes ok?
>>
>> If review fails, the necessary adjustments can be done on the "working
>> branch" created above, as the PR tracks that.
>>
>> If all changes are ok, this branch is merged in the target branch (pull
>> the target branch, merge the "working branch", push changes to the
>> central repository). The "Merge changes" Button in github PRs does
>> exactly that ans there is also a "Command line instructions" link, that
>> shows what happens under the hood.
>>
>> For the merge to master a committer is needed, all interaction on the
>> PR can be done by "non-committers".
>>
>> The current PR on github show the "normal" way. A committer would now
>> merge these (after review or whatever).
>>
>> The big question: Is the github mirroring of the netbeans repository
>> two way? So are merges done on github cloned into the apache
>> repository?
>>
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>

Re: To branch or to fork.

2017-09-25 Thread Geertjan Wielenga 
I would prefer this approach too, also since we're working in this way
naturally already, however I have seen "Can't you do that in a branch of
the ASF repository instead? It's better IMO if things stay here.” from
Bertrand, one of our mentors. Hoping there'll be clarity on this point from
our mentors via this thread.

Gj

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Matthias Bläsing  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Am Montag, den 25.09.2017, 01:05 +0200 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> > See:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Git+workflow+for+in
> > frastructure-puppet+repo
> >
> > Gj
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The Apache Way is to branch, rather than fork -- the idea being
> > > that via
> > > branches, the code stays at Apache, rather than being somewhere
> > > else, i.e.,
> > > in someone else's Git repo.
> > >
> > > From the branch, reviews are done, prior to merging.
>
> The means everybody that wants code merged needs write access to the
> netbeans git repository.
>
> I don't see any benefit here. The normal github way is:
>
>  * fork the project
>  * create a working branch for your changeset from the development
>branch/target branch and name it matching your intention
>  * do your changes
>  * create a PR (on github via their system, in other environment via
>Email), which details your changes
>
> Now this PR is reviewed:
>
>  * Has the author an ICLA on file @apache (this might be
>interesting...)
>  * Are the changes ok?
>
> If review fails, the necessary adjustments can be done on the "working
> branch" created above, as the PR tracks that.
>
> If all changes are ok, this branch is merged in the target branch (pull
> the target branch, merge the "working branch", push changes to the
> central repository). The "Merge changes" Button in github PRs does
> exactly that ans there is also a "Command line instructions" link, that
> shows what happens under the hood.
>
> For the merge to master a committer is needed, all interaction on the
> PR can be done by "non-committers".
>
> The current PR on github show the "normal" way. A committer would now
> merge these (after review or whatever).
>
> The big question: Is the github mirroring of the netbeans repository
> two way? So are merges done on github cloned into the apache
> repository?
>
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #7: [NETBEANS-54] Module Review api.annotations.com...

2017-09-25 Thread jlahoda 
Github user jlahoda commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/7
  
I am afraid the license here is a little bit more complex. I think the 
license is probably BSD, at least based on FindBugs:

https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/blob/master/findbugs/licenses/LICENSE-jsr305.txt

(Its not clear where the Apache license note comes from, but it is probably 
not correct.)

Also, the file contains some re-packaged annotations from 
net.jcip.annotations, so these are presumably under:

https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs/blob/master/findbugs/licenses/LICENSE-jcip.txt

So we probably need a license file with these both and maybe even a 
-notice.txt.

The good thing on this particular place is that we only need this file for 
building.

The license file should be present even if the license would be Apache.

Otherwise, looks OK.



---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans pull request #4: Adding some Rat excludes.

2017-09-25 Thread jlahoda 
Github user jlahoda closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/4


---

[GitHub] incubator-netbeans issue #4: Adding some Rat excludes.

2017-09-25 Thread jlahoda 
Github user jlahoda commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/4
  
Pushed, thanks.


---