Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Since the converter can now add license headers to the form files, can you convert and push the form files currently in Apache NetBeans Git or is there a blocker for that? Gj On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 17:29, Jan Lahoda wrote: > It is not quite clear to me how this helps (e.g.

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

It is not quite clear to me how this helps (e.g. what do we do about Rat and form files? Will this lead to additional inquiries during release time?). But I've put my prototype of the form change to keep the leading comment here:

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

As mentioned in the pull request, I have a prototype change for the form module to preserve the leading comment (i.e. typically the license header). Jan On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I believe so, yes, though jlahoda would be

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

I think it's going to keep coming back to this discussion flow: "Do the form files contain any degree of creativity?" -- "Yes, they do." -- "Then, they need a license header, regardless of how that is done, they simply must have a license header, regardless if they were generated or not, there is

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

> > > Would it be possible to make the tool include a comment in the ‘.form’ > > file saying something like “This file is generated. Manual editing is > not > > recommended. See the accompanying Java file for license information’? > > > > > +1 > I suggested this when the issue was first raised.

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:34 PM Greg Trasuk wrote: > > > .form files even more so since they always come in pair with a .java > > file which will have a license header and is meant for a human. > > > > Would it be possible to make the tool include a comment in the ‘.form’

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 1:05 PM Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > And no the converter tool just looks for patterns and replaces them with > the Apache license automatically. > > I understand that. You suggested not changing the GUI Builder. My point was that as

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

>That time when you start another thread to discuss this (as requested), and everyone keeps talking here! ;-) :-) --emi On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Neil C Smith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:16 PM Emilian Bold wrote: > >> OK,

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:16 PM Emilian Bold wrote: > OK, if we go this way I've added > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-72 against the > guibuilder component. > That time when you start another thread to discuss this (as requested), and everyone keeps

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Makes sense, it certainly needs to be discussed how we want to handle this and an issue is a good thing for that. Gj On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Emilian Bold wrote: > OK, if we go this way I've added > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-72 against the >

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

OK, if we go this way I've added https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-72 against the guibuilder component. --emi On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > Well, the question is simply: "does the file have any degree of creativity"?

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Well, the question is simply: "does the file have any degree of creativity"? The answer for form files is "yes", even though they only make sense in combination with a Java source file, someone could take a look at simply a form file to try and learn from it and apply those lessons to their own

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

We absolutely do not want to work around anything and we absolutely want to be good citizens of the ASF and follow the Apache Way. Gj On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 14:17, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Emilian Bold >

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Emilian Bold wrote: > ...I also assume office ODT files are stored as-is and people don't have to > add license headers inside the zip container... My understanding is that you want to .gzip things to work around the license header

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

A PNG is also a binary. There is nothing magic about XMLs. We could switch to another format. I also assume office ODT files are stored as-is and people don't have to add license headers inside the zip container. --emi Pe 29 sept. 2017, la 14:30, Bertrand Delacretaz a

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Nothing you need to do, it's already been done. And no the converter tool just looks for patterns and replaces them with the Apache license automatically. Gj On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 14:01, Neil C Smith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:39 AM Geertjan Wielenga <

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:39 AM Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > A different approach might be to not change the GUI Builder to add them > automatically but, instead... to run the converter tool before each Apache > NetBeans release to add them that way, i.e., by

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Emilian Bold wrote: > A more practical idea would be to gzip .form files in future releases ;-) Binaries are frowned upon in Apache releases, we want things to be transparent. -Bertrand

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > ...run the converter tool before each Apache > NetBeans release to add them that way, i.e., by inserting the license > headers automatically before each release via the tool... I like this idea, would

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

h...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < >>> bdelacre...@apache.org >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

A different approach might be to not change the GUI Builder to add them automatically but, instead... to run the converter tool before each Apache NetBeans release to add them that way, i.e., by inserting the license headers automatically before each release via the tool. That would mean no

Re: Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

I believe so, yes, though jlahoda would be the best to answer this. Gj On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Neil C Smith < neilcsmith@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:51 AM Geertjan Wielenga < > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Since we can generate the headers

Form editor license support Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:51 AM Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Since we can generate the headers into the form files, and Jan Lahoda has > already done this via the tool, why not accept them into the Apache > NetBeans source code? Indeed, one of the highest

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

+1 And the issue is there to be used as well: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-327 Gj On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Neil C Smith > wrote: > > ...What's the

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Neil C Smith wrote: > ...What's the status of license support in the form editor?... Please start new threads for new questions, it's currently very hard for people who are only involved part time (like mentors ;-) to follow.

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

gt; > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Jan Lahoda <lah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > > > bdelacre...@apache.org > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > >>

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

2:19 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > > bdelacre...@apache.org > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > > >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > >> > ..

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Jan Lahoda wrote: > ...seems easier to me to add the > header than discuss why these files don't have the license header on each > release... That was my point - making the release simpler to review is a Good Thing, especially in the Incubator

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > > bdelacre...@apache.org > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > > >> <geertjan.wiele...

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

elenga > >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> > ...So, in the end, what will be left in the Rat report are only the > >> > potentially problematic files... > >> > >> That sounds great. If people want mentors to review specific

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Hi, > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > >> >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> >> > ...So, in the end, what will be left in the Rat report are only the > >> >&g

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

ertjan Wielenga >> >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> > ...So, in the end, what will be left in the Rat report are only the >> >> > potentially problematic files... >> >> >> >> That sounds great. If people want ment

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

> wrote: > >> > ...So, in the end, what will be left in the Rat report are only the > >> > potentially problematic files... > >> > >> That sounds great. If people want mentors to review specific modules > >> that are ready, please send their URLs defi

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

org >> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > ...So, in the end, what will be left in the Rat report are only the >> > potentially problematic files... >&

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

; > potentially problematic files... > > That sounds great. If people want mentors to review specific modules > that are ready, please send their URLs defining exactly what's ready > for review. > At this time, I think ones that would be interesting to get feedback on are: https:

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Hi, On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > ...So, in the end, what will be left in the Rat report are only the > potentially problematic files... That sounds great. If people want mentors to review specific modules that are r

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > ...Do you agree that if a file in the donated ZIP is licensed to Oracle or to > Sun that it belonged to Oracle prior to the donation and that after the > donation it belongs to Apache and can be

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > > ... > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/ > List+of+Modules+to+Review > > The process looks good to me in general, in

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Hi, On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > ... > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/List+of+Modules+to+Review The process looks good to me in general, in terms of preparing code for an Apache release. To be on the safe side best is probably to finish one

Re: [mentors] Review of Modules Review

Here's the "Modules review" thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/dc796794f1d865ec368cd93cd28b82376890945e22bab340d954b7a6@%3Cdev.netbeans.apache.org%3E Gj On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi Mentors, > > Just want to make

[mentors] Review of Modules Review

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.