Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

Le 08/11/16 à 18:47, Jim Jagielski a écrit : > Look at it this way: If it was required in order to develop *all* > languages, then it would be a problem. > > However, it is only required for those who desire to use NetBeans > to develop Java. At that point, they have already accepted a

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

The installer could even setup the directory, and an institution can copy that. The installer could also build other installers as another option; for private distribution by end users. Wade On Nov 8, 2016 5:11 AM, "Geertjan Wielenga" < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Yup. I'm sure

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

Hi, So how do you see this going forward? Currently we have 6 download packages, will we have multiple ones when we Apache Netbeans is released?, or will we have 4 downloads (HTML+Javascript, PHP & C/C++, ALL), but the installer always gives the option to install Java? As I think I could

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

It would be a smooth process via the installer. Gj On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:43 PM, John Yeary wrote: > Hello All, > > I agree with John. > > One of the things that I really find annoying about Eclipse is that you > have all of these options, and as a new user it is a

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

HI, To me Netbeans has always been first and foremost a Java IDE. This move now seems to be making Java an optional extra to Netbeans that means I need to head off somewhere else to get this nb-javac module. Now I was probably wrong in always thinking that NB is a Java IDE first and

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > Geertjan and others already clarified and are documenting the modularity of > NetBeans [2], with the core NetBeans platform being the only required part. > All other modules (or clusters) being optional. > So many users might not need the

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

I'm top posting on just the last response in this thread, as I think the discussion is drifting too much and not adding much value nor new insights. And it seems to be building up unnecessary irritations as result. Instead I will try to recap and summarize the current state to break out of the

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 6, 2016 5:31 AM, "Neil C Smith" wrote: > > On 6 November 2016 at 02:16, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > >> > Assuming the answer to my licensing question is no, then I'm > >> > interested in exactly how much nb-javac forks from javac and how > >>

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 6, 2016 5:26 AM, "Neil C Smith" wrote. > > What I'm saying about maintainability is that changes in the internals > of OpenJDK have the potential to stop nb-javac from functioning. So, > while we, the NetBeans community, may be able to manage the code on >

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 6, 2016 3:59 AM, "Niclas Hedhman" wrote: > > I give up. If you don't see that there is a difference between an operating > system and a JAR file (with the JRE somewhere in the middle), I am not > going to re-re-re-re-re-reiterate the view that we are not lawyers, and if

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 6, 2016 5:26 AM, "Neil C Smith" wrote: > > Hi, > > On 5 November 2016 at 19:20, Wade Chandler wrote: > > On Nov 5, 2016 2:00 PM, "Neil C Smith" > > wrote: > >> > > The same would > > be the case with

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

Hi all, for me it seems there are two parts of this discussion: 1. The legal part about GPL+CPE 2. The technical problem of maintaining a javac fork I think 2 is already a problem (a BIG thanks to Jan Lahoda who still keeps this working and even provides branches working with Valhalla...) that

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On 6 November 2016 at 02:16, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> > Assuming the answer to my licensing question is no, then I'm >> > interested in exactly how much nb-javac forks from javac and how >> > maintainable it is from outside? > > Java (or more precisely, JRE, pre-OpenJDK) was

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

Hi, On 5 November 2016 at 19:20, Wade Chandler wrote: > On Nov 5, 2016 2:00 PM, "Neil C Smith" > wrote: >>Why I think this >> is different to reliance on almost any other library is the way javac >> uses the internals of the JRE. eg. the

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 5, 2016 2:00 PM, "Neil C Smith" wrote: > > Hi, > > Is top-posting or inline replying the norm here? Anyway, replies below :-) > It depends on devices and whether one is replying to pieces or a whole I guess; for inline. I do think in the age of diverse

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

> Could nb-javac features be merged with javac, or become ide-javac within OpenJDK, providing similar services to any IDE? This would be pretty nice. Just like javac and Nashorn has an official Tree API we could have an Editor API for both. --emi On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Neil C Smith

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

Perhaps specific threads can be created to discuss the Java and JavaScript support in NetBeans (independently/maybe together). I think a big part of the question is what does Oracle think about supporting nb-javac and graal.js if they are only used by NetBeans. I mean, is there some long term

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

I think there is “what can be at Apache; source or built artifacts” and “what can my platform application include in its final build; which isn’t at Apache; even if it uses an Apache license” and “how can Apache NetBeans help me package my dependencies, per my choices, regardless of Apache’s

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 5, 2016 1:53 AM, "Niclas Hedhman" wrote: > > > Yes, I think we all understand the "end user interaction model" that you > have in mind to overcome the licensing issues. > > However, I am talking about licensing principles and how the ASF has > operated over the last

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Nov 4, 2016 11:27 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: > > > IMO the "can Apache projects rely on components under prohibited > licenses?" section of http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html applies, > and the key question is then whether the external component's license >

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > I don't like to come off as a preacher, so please don't take this the wrong > way. I am trying to avoid future headaches... I don't really understand your point. Ate has explained the legal question that needs to be resolved and Bertrand

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

Geertjan, I don't like to come off as a preacher, so please don't take this the wrong way. I am trying to avoid future headaches... Yes, I think we all understand the "end user interaction model" that you have in mind to overcome the licensing issues. However, I am talking about licensing

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > I'm clueless about the NetBeans code structure and what clusters are, > > > That's precisely why I am putting together this: >

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: I'm clueless about the NetBeans code structure and what clusters are, That's precisely why I am putting together this: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Overview%3A+NetBeans+Structure but do you mean that nb-javac is

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: >>... http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html applies, ... > > In the above reference, I see this: "For example, using a GPL'ed tool > during the

Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > IMO the "can Apache projects rely on components under prohibited > licenses?" section of http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html applies, > and the key question is then whether the external component's license > terms affect the NetBeans