Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Indeed, there is no code on plugins.netbeans.org at all. No one can donate any code from anywhere on plugins.netbeans.org to anyone else. It simply contains binaries, i.e., NBM files, which are ZIP archives containing a JAR together with some metadata needed for installing it. Quite a few of them

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

NetBeans.org has forums that mirror the mailing lists (well, not always, sometimes we've had syncing problems). My feeling is that since Apache doesn't support forums, we could simply drop them. No need to convert the forums to mailing lists, instead our mailing lists will need to be moved if

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

I can't wait for that to happen! In the meantime, can we call NetBeans by its real name: NetBeans, with an uppercase N and an uppercase B? Shall we all start maintaining that, i.e., using the correct name, which is NetBeans or, better yet, Apache NetBeans? Yes, Oracle is handing over everything

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Brilliant! On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote: > On 2016-09-14 21:49, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > >> I can't wait for that to happen! In the meantime, can we call NetBeans by >> its real name: NetBeans, with an uppercase N and an uppercase

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Many thanks everyone for the enthusiasm and also for the new mentors -- indeed, an infrastructure-focused mentor or two will be really relevant. We have of course had several discussions and mail exchanges with our mentors before publishing the proposal. The bottom line is, we want to fit into

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

It really does sound like these licensing and distribution concerns can be solved in one way or another. Also, from the NetBeans side, we're going to do everything we can to fit into the most optimal Apache approach to structuring our infrastructure under Apache. We want to end up in a situation

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

wrote: > On 2016-09-15 14:15, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > >> Hi Incubator PMC, >> >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> ... https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansPropos

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

projects that have made a similar move > and experienced higher quality as a result? > > > Mitch > > > On 09/15/2016 07:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > >> Hi Incubator PMC, >> >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wie

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

t 8:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi Incubator PMC, > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> ... https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansProp

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

isted, are any > available to be migrated or donated to the ASF? Or expected to be? > > Mac builds is an interesting topic on this as well. > > On Sep 15, 2016 6:36 PM, "Geertjan Wielenga" < > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Notes on th

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Thanks. Contacting him. More info, this time statistics: Total Physical Source Lines of Code = 8,281,256 Total Number of Files = 64927 Thanks, Geertjan: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 1:22 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Geertjan

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

6 at 1:22 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > Notes on the NetBeans infrastructure from the NetBeans build engineer. >> Who >> > from Apache i

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Notes on the NetBeans infrastructure from the NetBeans build engineer. Who from Apache infra is going to do 1:1 discovery? Public servers: - www.netbeans.org: The core of the netbeans.org project, as well as user management, bugzilla, and mailing lists. - hg.netbeans.org: 1 VM with 32 Mercurial

[DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

(Oracle) * Vladimir Voskresensky (Oracle) * Dmitry Zharkov (Oracle) * Liang Chen (Oracle) * Geertjan Wielenga (Oracle) * Tomas Zezula (Oracle) * Dusan Balek (Oracle) * Svatopluk Dedic (Oracle) * Tomas Hurka (Oracle) * Milutin Kristofic (Oracle) * Jiri Sedlacek (Oracle) * Miloslav Metelka (Oracle)

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

likely and stable scenario. I am sure other Apache projects have similar arrangements and this will not be new for Apache in any way. Gj On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: > On Sep 24, 2016 23:08, "Geertjan Wielenga" <geertjan.wieleng

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > won't plugins.netbeans.org run for another few months with Oracle > infrastructure? If it does, is it urgent enough to block incubation? For me > it does not look that way. Indeed, this is not an urgent issue from the point of view of

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

velopment with Java and JSF": https://leanpub.com/jsf > "Java Lambdas und (parallel) Streams" Deutsche Ausgabe: > https://leanpub.com/lambdas-de > "Java Lambdas and (parallel) Streams" English edition: > https://leanpub.com/lambdas > > On 09/23/2016 03:30 PM, G

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

We're actively discussing with various organizations about the future home of plugins.netbeans.org. We'd certainly not want to go into the future without our Plugin Portal and plugins, there's no point in pointing out to the NetBeans community the importance of its plugins. :-) I am comfortable

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

PS: GitHub may be an option too, though right now we're working with two or three different organizations, to see which would be the best home for plugins.netbeans.org. On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Yup. For sure.

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

of plugins.netbeans.org and the range of organizations available who could be the host of that service and the fact that we are already exploring this with some of them. Just my 2c on this. Gj On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:11 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Geertjan

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

th Java and JSF: leanpub.com/jsf > Java Lambdas and Parallel Streams: leanpub.com/lambdas > > > Am 23. September 2016 07:50:53 MESZ, schrieb Geertjan Wielenga < > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com>: > >Hi all, > > > >Indeed, I now have greater clarity on t

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

sal 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. Thanks, Gj On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > O

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Monday, September 26, 2016, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

> > My guess is that the first 6 months is the most expensive as it > involves a lot of time from infrastructure to migrate resources or > figure out alternatives. My guess is, based on Daniels estimate, that > first year is 13-30k - each year thereafter is 3-10k per year in costs > (whether those

Re: [VOTE] Accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator

to NetBeans, > > while > > those without bold means that the contributor has an intention to > > contribute to > > Apache NetBeans while not having done so before. That does not mean that > > those > > in bold are better or worse, just that they'll be abl

Re: [VOTE] Accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 7:39 PM, jag wrote: > +1 (expressing unbridled enthusiasm and glee!!) Note: The above is James Gosling. :-) - Gj On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 7:39 PM, jag wrote: > +1 (expressing unbridled enthusiasm and glee!!) > > > > -- > View this message in

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Netbeans - Exception Reporter

Yup, we need to include it in the transition in some way and will need to list in the Wiki once we have set that up. Gj On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:02 PM, cowwoc wrote: > Hi, > > One of the main feature I value in the Netbeans infrastructure is the > automated exception

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

last 6 month (or so) on the > initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and > disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project. > > This are at the moment my biggest concerns. > > Regards Raphael > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Geertja

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On 18.09.2016 9:46 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > There is no rush, no dates, no deadlines at the ASF. It may take longer via > mailing lists, but it means that the larger community can be involved, can > review, and can be archived. Makes sense -- and indeed the more details we have up front the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

ad blood and > disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project. > > This are at the moment my biggest concerns. > > Regards Raphael > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Nightly

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Thanks a lot for the input, Leonardo! Great to have you part of the future Apache NetBeans community. :-) Gj On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Leonardo Loch Zanivan wrote: > As a NetBeans community contributor and plugin maker, I'll try to clarify > some points about how

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

> before doing a release there is a manual stabilisation phase? Or do you > only apply finished features? > > Question is whether we need Gerrit or something similar. Or is plain GIT > enough? > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > > On Friday, 16 September 2016, 7

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Bayer <andrew.ba...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > - deadlock.netbeans.org: 6 VMs, used mainly for propagation of changes > > between team repositories and to the re

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

t; +1 > >> > >> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] > >>> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 00:46 > >>> To: general@incubator.apache.org > >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] A

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

No one said we want to keep that many subdomains. We're simply listing our current infrastructure at this point. I'd say we probably need a lot less than we currently have. Gj On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org> wrote: > On 16.09.2016 00:36, Geertjan

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

. Gj On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 1:53 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org> > wrote: > > On 16.09.2016 00:36, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > > [...] > >> > >> Public servers: >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

riginal Message- > >>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] > >>> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 00:46 > >>> To: general@incubator.apache.org > >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal > >>> > &

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

ache.org> > 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, Geertjan Wielenga < > > geertjan.wiele...

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 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

mined? Or more importantly, if he > wants to be added to that list up-front would that be OK? > > Thanks, > Roman. > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > Attached

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

builds and that is supported, from your response here. Geertjan On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > ...th

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

use case for jenkins pipelines, to orchestrate the build > steps required programmatically via a groovy DSL instead of job configs. > > John > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 9:19 AM Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM

Re: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "NetBeansProposal" by GeertjanWielenga

Yup. I stand corrected and have deleted. :-) Gj On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 1:39 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > Its generally not good practice to edit the proposal once the vote has > started. > > John > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 7:38 PM Apache Wiki

Re: Netbeans expectations (Was: Re: ASF doing too much? (Was: Re: TAC))

>From the NetBeans side, we appreciate Roman's callibration and Jim's transparency and Ate's diplomacy. Onwards. Gj On Wednesday, September 28, 2016, Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > (removing board@ which has nothing to do with this) > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:39

Re: Netbeans expectations (Was: Re: ASF doing too much? (Was: Re: TAC))

to be invaluable! Gj On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote: > On 2016-09-28 00:50, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > >> Sorry, Bertrand, not Ate, though I feel they're in sync. >> > > In this case, you felt right :-) > > Syncing with the mentors would hav

Re: Netbeans expectations (Was: Re: ASF doing too much? (Was: Re: TAC))

Sorry, Bertrand, not Ate, though I feel they're in sync. Gj On Wednesday, September 28, 2016, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > From the NetBeans side, we appreciate Roman's callibration and Jim's > transparency and Ate's diplomacy. > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

; >community then you can quickly vote to change their status... > > > >Anyways I'm going to go back to lurking in the background... > > > >Regards > > > >John > > > > > >On 25 September 2016 at 07:40, Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org>

Re: Radical proposal: no initial list of committers

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > For example, I'm really curious whether the current cast of NetBeans > mentors are really aware of the IP review workload that is going to hit > them > once NetBeans tries to produce its first official Apache Release. In that regard,

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

p 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> ...I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it >>> will be >>> useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are, >

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

at this point. Gj On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org > wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > ...I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads,

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it will be useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are, etc etc. From the NetBeans side of things, we're a large community and lots of us are following all this and maybe someone can point us Apache

Re: Reuse Maven repository more was: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

This would be brilliant. Make it happen! Gj On Wednesday, September 28, 2016, Jaroslav Tulach wrote: > On sobota 24. září 2016 12:17:21 CEST, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Certain services like the plugins hosting will rely on Legal giving the > > go-ahead for it,

Re: NetBeans next steps

Or maybe a list of names could be provided of those who have already sent in there ICLAs for Apache NetBeans (incubating)? And those could then enter the process of having their accounts created manually. Gj On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.

Re: NetBeans next steps

OK, thanks, will work with Wade and others who may be encountering this. Gj On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > Wade, > > ICLAs submitted before the vote don't get accounts created automatically. > Please reach out to your mentors to get your account

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: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

t; wrote: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> 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 t

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

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Don't make the request until the IPMC can present an argument that a move > of NetBeans to the ASF will reverse the decline in interest that NetBeans > is seeing. OK, we do need to see the basis for that assertion. I think the only thing

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, >> &

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: [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

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > My only concern, if you go ahead with a vote before you get an ack, is > that you vote in a podling that may not get the resources it needs. I'd like to reiterate a point I have made earlier: the preliminary NetBeans cost findings are

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

brings (and is ultimately what the > Netbeans community is after). Realistically, those who used to contribute > will know the code base better than those who are just coming in, to be > able to help guide new contributors on what to look out for. > > > > > > Anyw

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

ight feel for having been omitted. :-) All the above info can be added to the proposal, if this is desirable, though the long list of individual contributors already there should be evidence enough in itself that we're working hard on being inclusive and getting broad involvement in this project

Re: Write access to Incubator Wiki

Done. Gj On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Willem Jiang wrote: > Hi, > > May I have the write access of Incubator wiki for editing the page of > incubator? > > My name is njiang, email is ningji...@apache.org > > Thanks, > > Willem Jiang > > Blog:

Re: [DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - September 2017

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:23 AM, John D. Ament wrote: Geertjan, > > What if we add a note under Legal, something like: > > - Thanks to hard work on both the Oracle and ASF side, the Netbeans team > was able to get the first three repositories populated from a software > grant. > > ? > Great!

Re: [DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - September 2017

Makes sense, was missing your reminders, now I know why. Looking forward to reporting again, heaps will have happened in the interim. Gj On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 at 12:28, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:40 AM Geertjan Wielenga < >

Re: [DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - September 2017

NetBeans went through some developments during this past month, not sure where that would fit, maybe a place can be added for it and we'll fill in the details? Gj On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > Pulsar is now signed off and also shepherd notes

[RESULT][Vote] Release of Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Alpha [RC2]

Dear IPMC Community, I am pleased to announce that the Incubator PMC has approved the release of Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Alpha rc2. The vote has passed with: four binding "+1" votes no "0" votes no "-1" votes The votes were

[Vote] Release of Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Alpha [RC2]

Hi all, The Apache NetBeans community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Alpha rc2. We now kindly request that the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release candidate. Apache NetBeans (incubating) is an open source development

Re: [VOTE] Release 1.5 of NetBeans HTML/Java API

Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator. How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, i.e., at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding votes, then the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

See this page, most/several items are mentioned there, including the new splash screen: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+9.0+RC1 Note that we're not working on the final release of Apache NetBeans, but on its release candidate. Indeed, this is confusing --

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

2018 at 3:38 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > ...The license files listed in the Rat report are known and an issue > exists > >>> for solving this: > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-305 ... > > I

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

, 2018, Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > ...The license files listed in the Rat report are known and an issue >> exis

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

And the open issue is mentioned directly in the vote thread itself by Emilian: The license files listed in the Rat report are known and an issue exists >> for solving this: > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-305 > > Gj On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

+1 (non binding) Signatures verified after importing the 1CCF4647 key from here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/netbeans/KEYS SHA1 digests match. DISCLAIMER and NOTICE look good. nbbuild/rat-exclusions.txt, we need to work on making it smaller, but we have documented

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 RC1 released

None? I see this one working: http://www-eu.apache.org/dist/incubator/netbeans/incubating-netbeans-java/incubating-9.0-rc1/ ...and this one: http://www-us.apache.org/dist/incubator/netbeans/incubating-netbeans-java/incubating-9.0-rc1/ I'm sure the others are still in process. Gj On Mon,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

AFAIK these have all been removed, I removed several of these myself. Gj On Saturday, May 26, 2018, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > > Please check that your rat exclusions have not been set to too wide and > rat shovel pick up these issues. > > Correcting: > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

If we create an issue for removing that ZIP file, will you change your +0 to +1? Gj On Sunday, May 27, 2018, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > I wonder where exactly (most) of these files come from. > > Sorry, many apologies, and my mistake as I looked at your last

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 RC1 (incubating) rc1

Only binding votes from Ate and Bertrand thus far. Gj On Sunday, May 27, 2018, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > If we create an issue for removing that ZIP file, will you change your +0 > > to +1? > > I’ve not had a chance to go over everything yet, it’s not a small

Re: [ANN] Please welcome Justin Mclean as the new Incubator PMC chair!

Congratulations and thanks for your great work and support of the Apache NetBeans (incubating) project, looking forward to even more interactions with you. Gj On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Sharan Foga wrote: > Congratulations Justin and thanks John for all the hard work you have done! > > On

[VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

Hi all, The Apache NetBeans community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2. We now kindly request that the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release candidate. Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) constitutes all the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

The exclusions are in the build.xml in github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans. I am quite sure that the rat exclusions are set too wide, at this point, the idea being to resolve those over the coming releases bit by bit. Gj On Sunday, January 21, 2018, Justin Mclean

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

running rat, as a starting point. Then we’ll all have the same results and can start discussions from the same basis. Gj On Sunday, January 21, 2018, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Yes, we excluded test/*/data directories via rat exclusions on the basis >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

Yes, we excluded test/*/data directories via rat exclusions on the basis that files within them are test data and hence can be excluded. There is no test code here. At worst, as pointed out below, there’s pseudo code. Gj On Saturday, January 20, 2018, Jan Lahoda wrote: > On

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

I am not sure what the point is of spending time on putting rat exclusions together if they’re simply going to be ignored when it comes to IPMC members evaluating a release. Yes, we can of course discuss those rat exclusions. No, they cannot simply be ignored and we cannot be confronted with a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

project that has a long history > outside Apache. I don't that Netbeans has any such problems and it sucks to > have to do the due diligence, but that diligence really is due before > release. > > > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 2:01 AM, Geertjan Wielenga < > geertjan.wiele...@goo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2

The very last thing you’ll find us doing is ignoring your advice. We have taken everything everyone has said and suggested from the very start very seriously. It is for that very reason that, for example, we’d like rat exclusions to be discussed and not ignored and for it also to be affirmed that

Re: License headers on test data (was Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2)

We have created one of many[1] issues dedicated to data files in */test/*data folders. The point is that these are all data files, used by our tests, and if license headers were to be added the tests would fail. E.g., some tests make use of a position in the file, which would be different (and

Re: License headers on test data (was Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc2)

://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-318 [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NETBEANS-306 Thanks, Gj On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:28 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:22 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com&g

[VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3

Hi all, The Apache NetBeans community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3. We now kindly request that the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release candidate. Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) constitutes all the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3

issue, has the jar been removed from the new RC? I just scanned a > couple of the links below but didn’t see any mention of this. > > david jencks > >> On Feb 9, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Geertjan Wielenga >> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3

Thanks a lot, these should be trivial to fix, will make issues for all and merge for the next release. Gj On Friday, February 16, 2018, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > I know the vote is over but you may want to fix this issues I noticed > before the next release: > -

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3

Yes, we split up the issues into those we would fix for the Beta release and those for after that before but before leaving the incubator. This is all documented on the rc3 page on our Wiki, i.e., it is clearly documented which items we committed to fixing for Beta and which for after that and the

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3

will proceed to publish the release and send ANNOUNCE. On behalf of the Apache NetBeans podling, thank you! Geertjan -- Forwarded message -- From: Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> Date: Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 10:36 PM Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta (incubating) rc3

Thanks again, Gj On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 5:26 AM, Geertjan Wielenga < geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Thanks a lot, these should be trivial to fix, will make issues for all and > merge for the next release. > > Gj > > > On Friday, February 1

[ANNOUNCE] Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta released

The Apache NetBeans team is proud to announce the release of Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta. Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta constitutes all the modules in the Apache NetBeans Git repo, which together provide the NetBeans Platform (i.e., the underlying application framework), which

  1   2   >