Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > >> Just to make sure that my argument is clearly stated let me make two points >> very, very explicitly: >>1. I would expect the folks

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > wrote: >> ...The vote on this proposal is explicitly not tied to contact being >> made to everyone for inclusion

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > ...All the above info can be added to the proposal, if this is desirable,.. I don't think that's needed, your explanations here are now recorded in the archives of this public list, that's good enough

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

+1 I assume we will have a 'contribute' section on the official site which explains this and also educate people to please mention their previous contributions on their first contact on the Apache NetBeans mailing lists. That way we can easily pick up people with merit that predates the ASF

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 26/09/16 à 22:49, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit : > Thankl of the below has been done. > > Some more are being added. However at this point the more we add the more > insulting to those we omit. We've done our best. The list is strong. None > will commit nothing, all have a history of years being

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > Just to make sure that my argument is clearly stated let me make two points > very, very explicitly: >1. I would expect the folks bringing NetBeans to ASF Incubator to have > had > spent reasonable amount of time trying to

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Thankl of the below has been done. Some more are being added. However at this point the more we add the more insulting to those we omit. We've done our best. The list is strong. None will commit nothing, all have a history of years being active in one way or another in the NetBeans community. Gj

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 26/09/16 à 07:32, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit : > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > > >> But if you are thinking 100 people, I'd try to get it down to 40-ish. > > Seems like a very random number. In the case of NetBeans, that would mean > we'd have few others on the list than

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Yup, done -- what will you be working on in Apache NetBeans? Based on the books and documentation you've written, I imagine something along those lines, while you're also a Java EE expert, so I could see you contributing in different ways there too, as well as being a JCP expert group member. A

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi GJ, due to technical problems I missed one day of the discussion. I'm going to catch up. If possible, please add to to the initial commiters. Herzliche Grüße - Best Regards, Michael Müller Brühl, Germany blog.mueller-bruehl.de it-rezension.de

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > ...It looks to me we are ready for voting on this proposal, as soon as the > infra assessment and discussion around it has been settled as well I agree with that, and now that the infra estimation is in (in another thread on

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi, On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > ...The vote on this proposal is explicitly not tied to contact being > made to everyone for inclusion on the initial contributors list... I agree with that, I guess what Roman would like to see is

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > From my point of view, voting on the proposal should not happen until > this > > has been done, working on it now, approaching people to ask them to be > > added to the list, and will be writing mails to NetBeans mailing lists. > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > But if you are thinking 100 people, I'd try to get it down to 40-ish. Seems like a very random number. In the case of NetBeans, that would mean we'd have few others on the list than those from Oracle, which is not what we want -- instead, we

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

IMO, the only things to consider for the initial committers list are: If you leave someone off the list: - it takes bit longer to get their next commit into the repo. - that person may be have hurt feelings as to why some other person is on the list. (so don't leave off the person who can quickly

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: > > >> Correct. The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the >> community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes -

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >... > scenario. I am sure other Apache projects have similar arrangements and > this will not be new for Apache in any way. > Yeup. The most obvious example being repo.maven.apache.org pointing to

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Rich Bowen wrote: > Having a third party run a service under an Apache brand requires working > with VP Brand. Indeed, this is something we're going to need to do. I.e., there will be existing NetBeans services that Apache will not be hosting. The clearest

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

On Sep 24, 2016 23:08, "Geertjan Wielenga" wrote: > > Yes, excellent work and many thanks for the time taken on this, Daniel. For > anyone reading this -- do note that these are preliminary findings based on > the current infrastructure of NetBeans, which is

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 25/09/16 à 05:22, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit : > It really is impossible for us to follow all the (in many cases > contradictory) advice we have been given re the initial contributors list. And this is the reason you have mentors and a champion. Follow their advices, you'll be fine (because if

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

I never said comparative use. --- Twitter: @rgardler From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 1:47:38 PM To: Incubator General Subject: Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Inc

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sep 24, 2016 9:51 AM, "Emilian Bold" wrote: > > Which brings us to another question: > > If the commits just referenced a bugzilla ticket, do we also like to > > migrate the bugzilla content over? > > Or at least keep it browsable somewhere? > > > > I would want to keep

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

On Sep 25, 2016 01:18, "Justin Mclean" wrote: > > Hi, > > > E.g., no forums in Apache, for example. > > A mailing list can be mirrored to a nibble forum if it helps [1] I know of several projects who do that. The asf has a service - lists.apache.org -which does exactly

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi Geertjan, You have already noticed that at Apache we don’t all speak with one voice. Even those who have literally been here for years may appear to disagree on the details, while I expect most agree on the broad strokes. Kudos for taking all the advice and proposing a plan to move this

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 2016-09-25 17:20, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Ate Douma wrote: and not all committers are required to commit :-) That is interesting. Can you explain more about that? What I meant to say is that at the ASF we also value and honour merit based on things

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Le 25 sept. 2016 18:50, "Geertjan Wielenga" < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> a écrit : >... In all fairness, it's simply impossible to prove the comparative usage of > one development tool over another. > > I'm also concerned that this is a discussion point at all in this context So am I.

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:32 PM, John Ament said: So the concern I raised to Geertjan was that he had committers > listed who had never committed to Netbeans previously, but was excluding > people who used to commit to Netbeans. For the record, no one was being excluded. The original approach

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > I am not opposed to Geertjan/NetBeans team refining the current list, > but please don't delay the incubation vote by doing so. Absolutely agree. > And above all please avoid giving the impression that whatever list > you come up

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > What I'm saying is that to make a case for extra budget there needs to be > solid justification that a move to ASF will help the community grow. This is the first I've heard of this. My one data point is

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Hi Daniel, On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > ...ballpark costs, bandwidth, machines needed and so forth, and the cliff > notes are as follows... Thanks very much for this - it is useful and I think we should do that for any "big" podling that comes

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > ...when I was a VP of Incubator a few years > ago I had to deal with a formal escalation brought to the ASF level > by somebody who felt unduly left out of that initial list of committers... The way I would deal

RE: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

of user numbers not being a good indicator is remains. > -Original Message- > From: Ross Gardler > Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 8:48 AM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache > NetBeans Incubator P

RE: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

r.apache.org > Subject: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans > Incubator Proposal) > > Ross Gardler is the current president of the ASF so in a way he does sign the > check and should be worried about these things. > > Still, the number of Java develop

RE: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

.txt Ross > -Original Message- > From: m...@wadechandler.com [mailto:m...@wadechandler.com] On Behalf Of > Wade Chandler > Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 8:04 PM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache &

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

John, Will try to respond in line. On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 2:59 AM John McDonnell wrote: > Hi All, > > > I am a netbeans user that has been following this thread since the > proposal was announced and I am a little fascinated with this whole > process, it seems rather

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Geertjan, This is a sound plan. On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 11:22 PM Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > It really is impossible for us to follow all the (in many cases > contradictory) advice we have been given re the initial contributors list. > > Here's what I propose:

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > and not all committers are required to commit :-) That is interesting. Can you explain more about that? Also, we have done a call for people who want to be added to the initial contributors list and will be adding a few more -- these are all

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 2016-09-25 12:15, Ate Douma wrote: On 2016-09-25 05:22, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: It really is impossible for us to follow all the (in many cases contradictory) advice we have been given re the initial contributors list. Hi GeertJan, I've gone through this whole thread again and IMO there

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Emilian Bold wrote: >... > alone could pull in ads the cost of infrastructure (although ASF might have > a policy against ads, etc, etc) > We never run ads. Ever. Just hang on a day or two, for us to *really* review these costs. Look at

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 2016-09-25 05:22, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: It really is impossible for us to follow all the (in many cases contradictory) advice we have been given re the initial contributors list. Hi GeertJan, I've gone through this whole thread again and IMO there really isn't so much contradictory

Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

om: Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ted.dunn...@gmail.com');>> > > Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 4:04:34 PM > > To: general@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','general@incubator.apache.org');> > > Sub

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

dler > > > From: Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 4:04:34 PM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache > NetBeans Incubator Proposal) >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 25.09.2016 08:59, John McDonnell wrote: [...] I have contributed defect fixes for JClouds in the past, and from what I see on this project is that there's an GitHub repo that allows people to contribute PR's, but theres also a ASF repo, which the contributors actually merge in the PRs from

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

request > to the board). > > Ross > > --- > Twitter: @rgardler > > > From: Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 4:04:34 PM > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Preliminary NetBeans co

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi All, I am a netbeans user that has been following this thread since the proposal was announced and I am a little fascinated with this whole process, it seems rather interesting... Although this initial committer list seems to be a sticking point, but from reading this page:

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 24.09.2016 15:10, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Jochen Theodorou For me the problem is that without plugins you have only the bare plattform and no IDE. No, that's not true at all. The NetBeans plugins are of various kinds. There are plugins that are listed in

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Hi, > E.g., no forums in Apache, for example. A mailing list can be mirrored to a nibble forum if it helps [1] I know of several projects who do that. Thanks, Justin 1. http://n4.nabble.com/archive-your-mailing-list.html -

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

It really is impossible for us to follow all the (in many cases contradictory) advice we have been given re the initial contributors list. Here's what I propose: 1. We make the initial contributors list as detailed as we can, i.e., I have already started doing this, grouping individual

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Yes, excellent work and many thanks for the time taken on this, Daniel. For anyone reading this -- do note that these are preliminary findings based on the current infrastructure of NetBeans, which is going to be very different under Apache, e.g., plugins.netbeans.org looks like it will be hosted

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

toki wrote on 9/24/16 8:04 PM: > On 22/09/2016 05:18, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >> had a non-trivial amount of commits to then Sun NetBeans between 2002-2008. >> He then drifted away from the >> project but would be interested, potentially, re-engaging. > > Is it possible to create a "master list'

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 22/09/2016 05:18, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > had a non-trivial amount of commits to then Sun NetBeans between 2002-2008. > He then drifted away from the > project but would be interested, potentially, re-engaging. Is it possible to create a "master list' of everybody who has contributed, when

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 3:07 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > Le 24/09/16 à 01:25, Roman Shaposhnik a écrit : > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > > wrote: > >> Hi Wade, > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler >

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal) Should this request come from IPMC? Seems like it should be at least a coop request between infra (who get the budget and the operational onus) and incubator (who cause the problem). Certainly the budge

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Should this request come from IPMC? Seems like it should be at least a coop request between infra (who get the budget and the operational onus) and incubator (who cause the problem). Certainly the budget shouldn't come to the IPMC if approved. I will work with the board to determine the best

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 24/09/16 à 01:25, Roman Shaposhnik a écrit : > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: >> Hi Wade, >> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler >> wrote: >>> ..I can say as a long time contributor who is not on

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 24/09/16 à 15:18, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit : > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: > > >> Correct. The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the >> community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes - and a >> key point of self-governance is

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Daniel this is great work. Thank you for outlining this. Wow! Chris On 9/24/16, 3:17 AM, "Daniel Gruno" wrote: Hi folks, I've been going over the requirements for NetBeans infrastructure, it's ballpark costs, bandwidth, machines needed and so forth, and

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

A NetBeans release is produced from the NetBeans Mercurial repository. All the language modules: Java, Javascript, C/C++, etc. you see there after install are Oracle / NetBeans code. The Plugins Portal has some other, 3rd party modules which don't come bundled with the official builds but users

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Michael Müller wrote: > regarding this, I request you ta add me to the initial committers. Done! Added you in the Miscellaneous section in the proposal. What specifically are you planning to contribute? Thanks, Gj On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Michael

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

> hg doesn't have the committer/author separation like GIT has, right? :( > I don't believe it does, yet. > In the ASF it's good practice to give credits to the patch contributor in > the commit, e.g. > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5bafa2ba5977ab88c8dfe376c97568 >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: > Correct. The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the > community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes - and a > key point of self-governance is responsibly adding new committers. > > In my experience, it's

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Jochen Theodorou For me the problem is that without plugins you have only the bare plattform > and no IDE. No, that's not true at all. The NetBeans plugins are of various kinds. There are plugins that are listed in the Plugin Manager by default, these are the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 24.09.2016 05:34, Wade Chandler wrote: [...] I ask these obvious rhetorical questions to get to this point: Would it be feasible for NetBeans to succeed among competing projects with such a stipulation that all hosted or distributed plugins be contributed to Apache or licensed the same?

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Good questions all. Emilian Bold wrote on 9/24/16 5:18 AM: > I assume there is a reason the list is called initial. It doesn't have to > be perfect. Correct. The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes - and a key

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

> Does Maven only host Apache owned plugins? Nope, don't mix up Apache Maven core with the 'Maven central' which is operated by Sonatype in conjunction with the Apache Maven PMC. It is more clear though with JFrog BinTray which is clearly owned by a company. Maven.central and Bintray both

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

hg doesn't have the committer/author separation like GIT has, right? :( In the ASF it's good practice to give credits to the patch contributor in the commit, e.g. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5bafa2ba5977ab88c8dfe376c9756825d948bce9afd3b69aa693ab96@%3Ccommits.openwebbeans.apache.org%3E

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Phone top posting: I agree plugins are a huge part of NetBeans success; you need them for Gradle support as an example. Sure, you can install them outside the portal, but it is a pain for most. What ever you all are able to do is greatly appreciated; whether now or soon, and whether that is an

Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal)

Hi folks, I've been going over the requirements for NetBeans infrastructure, it's ballpark costs, bandwidth, machines needed and so forth, and the cliff notes are as follows: - 40-50TB/month in traffic required (mostly downloads+plugins) - 8-13 machines/VMS are required - Ballpark hardware costs

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

I assume there is a reason the list is called initial. It doesn't have to be perfect. We should differentiate between a contributor and a committer. A lot more people contributed patches via bugzilla than actually committed them in the Mercurial repository themselves. The reason being it was

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Consider you did contribute 300 important patches to NetBeans over the years. Wouldn't it hurt your feelings that you are not enlisted on the initial committers list? But otoh the initial list of committers is not important for the ASF _if_ the PPMC makes a good job. Because if such a

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

So on one hand the initial commiters list is not something so important and we should realy just be careful about the PPMC then vote more commiters during incubation. On the other hand the initial commiters list is super important. Is there some actual incubation documentation clearing this up?

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Greg, many people on this list are probably unaware that your role changed a couple of days ago... On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@apache.org > > wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > wrote: > >...there hasn't even been a vote on the proposal at this stage. :-) > > Correct ;-) > > FWIW I've seen an

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi, I actually have a question regarding the plugins. Maybe I missed it in the discussion so far, but what will happen with all of those? I mean some are part of the binary download by default. Will they all move to apache license and then be hosted at apache if possible too, or will this

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:30 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > I spoke with Geertjan this afternoon. We both happened to be at the same > popular java conference in San Francisco. I did give him some advice on > the current initial contributors list. Basically two notes: > > -

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Wade Chandler > wrote: >> ...I recently contributed some things for Groovy support, and intend to work >> quite a bit on those features... >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi Wade, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler > wrote: >> ..I can say as a long time contributor who is not on the initial list, I >> understand, think it is fine, and

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > >> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >> criteria >> to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation? > > > Let's stop wasting

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 23/09/16 à 15:30, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit : > OK. Before the vote, will work on making the initial contributors list as > complete as possible. > > What is the process for doing that? Do I simply make changes directly in > the proposal? Do I make the changes public here before adding them to

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

OK. Before the vote, will work on making the initial contributors list as complete as possible. What is the process for doing that? Do I simply make changes directly in the proposal? Do I make the changes public here before adding them to the proposal? Do I work directly with the mentors via

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi Bertrand, Responses in line. On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:54 PM Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi Geertjan, > > I won't have time to look at your whole message now, just a few > clarifications as far as committers/PMC is concerned. > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:50 AM,

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

GJ, regarding this, I request you ta add me to the initial committers. -- Herzliche Grüße, Best regards Michael Müller Twitter: @muellermi Blog: blog.mueller-bruehl.de Web Development with Java and JSF: leanpub.com/jsf Java Lambdas and Parallel Streams: leanpub.com/lambdas Am 23. September

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi Geertjan, I won't have time to look at your whole message now, just a few clarifications as far as committers/PMC is concerned. On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > ...Anyone on the list > will, once the proposal has been voted on and

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi all, Indeed, I now have greater clarity on the initial contributors list thanks to meeting John Ament this afternoon. The initial contributors list is somehow a magic list. Anyone on the list will, once the proposal has been voted on and accepted, automatically be contributors to the Apache

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

I spoke with Geertjan this afternoon. We both happened to be at the same popular java conference in San Francisco. I did give him some advice on the current initial contributors list. Basically two notes: - Add new members based on merit, not because prior to joining they are interested. The

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

I'm very convinced :-) I think the Netbeans proposal is ready for a [VOTE]! On 22 September 2016 at 13:57, Wade Chandler wrote: > >> On Sep 22, 2016, at 08:27, Shane Curcuru wrote: >> >> Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: >>> On Thu,

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi, On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Wade Chandler wrote: > ...I recently contributed some things for Groovy support, and intend to work > quite a bit on those features... Anyone who works "quite a bit" on something that adds value to the project and interacts in a

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

> On Sep 22, 2016, at 08:27, Shane Curcuru wrote: > > Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik >> wrote: >> >>> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik > wrote: > >> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >> criteria >> to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation? > > Projects

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: >...there hasn't even been a vote on the proposal at this stage. :-) Correct ;-) FWIW I've seen an internal draft of Daniel Gruno's infrastructure cost analysis so that's progressing nicely, we should

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > > I think Netbeans has the balance somewhat right - but I would hope > there would be more engagement on their existing lists to more openly > invite anyone who wants to join; or at least make it clear that the > whole of the community

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Agree - but the initial committer list is also an opportunity to show you really mean open development, and that it's not just business as usual with Friends & Family on the list. One of the freedoms a project gains from moving to ASF is (somewhat) relief from institutional political

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi Wade, On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler wrote: > ..I can say as a long time contributor who is not on the initial list, I > understand, think it is fine, and agree that being added once we get into > the actual incubation phase makes sense... Thanks!

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sep 21, 2016 4:15 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Mark Struberg > wrote: > > ...Please note that during the incubation people need to either show that they > > are eager to engage with the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a criteria > to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation? Projects decision. -- The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a > criteria > to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation? Let's stop wasting time -- just provide his name so it can be added to the list, thanks. Geertjan On Thu, Sep 22, 2016

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Mark Struberg > wrote: >> ...Please note that during the incubation people need to either show that >> they >> are eager to engage with the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi, On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > ...Please note that during the incubation people need to either show that they > are eager to engage with the community... Indeed, but for a well established project like NetBeans I suppose the initial

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Please note that during the incubation people need to either show that they are eager to engage with the community. It's not that the Podling PMC (PPMC) randomly invites people just because their name get dropped, but the PPMC holds a VOTE based on their merit [1]. Usually all the initial

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Le 21/09/16 à 07:37, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit : > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > >> I've recently had an inquiry from a former Sun employee who >> used to hack on NetBeans way back when: how was the list >> of initial committers determined? Or more importantly, if he

  1   2   3   >