You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@netbeans.apache.org by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> on 2017/11/21 20:30:54 UTC
IDE release
Hi,
I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
change the release job:
https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
solve somehow besides javac:
db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
(presumably compile-time only at this time)
o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
will take some time to clean them up).
(When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
Thanks,
Jan
Re: IDE release
Posted by Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>.
If you know db was just an example then you should have understood my message disregarding the particular example.
Note that *not releasing* a module is not the same as *removing* a module.
I'm confident you will take care of everything.
--emi
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Re: IDE release
>Local Time: November 24, 2017 8:22 PM
>UTC Time: November 24, 2017 6:22 PM
>From: mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu
>To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
>Hey,
>
> Am Freitag, den 24.11.2017, 02:57 -0500 schrieb Emilian Bold:
>>There is no such 'resolution'. nb-javac is the only module important
>> enough to have a first-run/jit installer and we have received a go-
>> ahead from LEGAL. The go-ahead was not for all (L)GPL modules we
>> might also have in the current codebase.
>>
>> what are you saying? The short term solution: just get rid of the mysql
>> driver. The long term solution: Implement a generic helper, that has
>> meta-data as part of the ALv2 code, and allows the user after he
>> requests it to install drivers.
>>
>> So I'd enhance the DB Drivers dialog to have the option to install
>> additional drivers. My preferred source would be maven central, as I
>> know that many drivers will be covered by this.
>>
>> I'll take care of DB and I'd like everyone not to get trigger happy to
>> "just remove stuff". In this case I do care.
>>
>> The goal, imho, it to have a public NetBeans installer with Java 9
>> support for our users, preferably in 2017. In order to accomplish
>> that, cutting arbitrary secondary modules/features seems an
>> acceptable tradeoff.
>>
>> I did not disagree with reasoned removal modules, but with the
>> "everything and the kitchensink" approach.
>>
>> IMHO you picked the wrong sample when you called DB. The bigger part of
>> the problem (SwingX) is already tackled and so db dataview is clean and
>> db drivers can be easily cleaned. As said, I'll take care of it.
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hey,
Am Freitag, den 24.11.2017, 02:57 -0500 schrieb Emilian Bold:
> There is no such 'resolution'. nb-javac is the only module important
> enough to have a first-run/jit installer and we have received a go-
> ahead from LEGAL. The go-ahead was *not* for all (L)GPL modules we
> might also have in the current codebase.
what are you saying? The short term solution: just get rid of the mysql
driver. The long term solution: Implement a generic helper, that has
meta-data as part of the ALv2 code, and allows the user after he
requests it to install drivers.
So I'd enhance the DB Drivers dialog to have the option to install
additional drivers. My preferred source would be maven central, as I
know that many drivers will be covered by this.
I'll take care of DB and I'd like everyone not to get trigger happy to
"just remove stuff". In this case I do care.
> The goal, imho, it to have a public NetBeans installer with Java 9
> support for our users, preferably in 2017. In order to accomplish
> that, cutting arbitrary secondary modules/features seems an
> acceptable tradeoff.
I did not disagree with reasoned removal modules, but with the
"everything and the kitchensink" approach.
IMHO you picked the wrong sample when you called DB. The bigger part of
the problem (SwingX) is already tackled and so db dataview is clean and
db drivers can be easily cleaned. As said, I'll take care of it.
Greetings
Matthias
Re: IDE release
Posted by Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>.
There is no such 'resolution'. nb-javac is the only module important enough to have a first-run/jit installer and we have received a go-ahead from LEGAL. The go-ahead was *not* for all (L)GPL modules we might also have in the current codebase.
The goal, imho, it to have a public NetBeans installer with Java 9 support for our users, preferably in 2017. In order to accomplish that, cutting arbitrary secondary modules/features seems an acceptable tradeoff.
The java cluster depends on the ide cluster which has a *lot* of modules. Most of those are not necessary to make a Java IDE with Java 9, Maven, etc.
--emi
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Re: IDE release
>Local Time: November 23, 2017 8:21 PM
>UTC Time: November 23, 2017 6:21 PM
>From: mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu
>To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
>Hey,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 23.11.2017, 07:52 -0500 schrieb Emilian Bold:
>>You can make a fine Java IDE with Java 9 support even if you have no
>> MySQL connector out of the box or other secondary features which
>> would need more work otherwise.
>>
>> I disagree. The resolution is to remove the mysql connector and add a
>> JIRA issue to track the development of an "jit" installer.
>>
>> Removing the driver is trivial and if the module needs a justification,
>> there are other databases, that offer nicer licenses.
>>
>> If we now start to cut arbitrary modules, we begin to discuss the color
>> of the bike shed.
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hey,
Am Donnerstag, den 23.11.2017, 07:52 -0500 schrieb Emilian Bold:
> You can make a fine Java IDE with Java 9 support even if you have no
> MySQL connector out of the box or other secondary features which
> would need more work otherwise.
I disagree. The resolution is to remove the mysql connector and add a
JIRA issue to track the development of an "jit" installer.
Removing the driver is trivial and if the module needs a justification,
there are other databases, that offer nicer licenses.
If we now start to cut arbitrary modules, we begin to discuss the color
of the bike shed.
Greetings
Matthias
Re: IDE release
Posted by Neil C Smith <ne...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:53 PM Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>
wrote:
> I don't have any code yet but the idea is simple: just start excluding
> whole modules from the ide/java cluster.
>
Would a j2se / j2ee cluster split handle all the problems? Would that be
pulling too much out of a first release?
Best wishes,
Neil
--
Neil C Smith
Artist & Technologist
www.neilcsmith.net
Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org
Re: IDE release
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
I agree with that.
Gj
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>
wrote:
> I don't have any code yet but the idea is simple: just start excluding
> whole modules from the ide/java cluster.
>
> You can make a fine Java IDE with Java 9 support even if you have no MySQL
> connector out of the box or other secondary features which would need more
> work otherwise.
>
> --emi
>
> >-------- Original Message --------
> >Subject: Re: IDE release
> >Local Time: November 23, 2017 2:50 PM
> >UTC Time: November 23, 2017 12:50 PM
> >From: geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com
> >To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org, Emilian Bold <
> emilian.bold@protonmail.ch>
> >
> >On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Emilian Bold emilian.bold@protonmail.ch
> > wrote:
> >>My point was that a cluster reorganization would help us release in 2017.
> >>
> >
> >What would that reorganization look like and do feel free to submit a PR
> > for evaluation.
> >
> > Gj
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>--emi
> >>>-------- Original Message --------
> >>> Subject: Re: IDE release
> >>> Local Time: November 23, 2017 7:50 AM
> >>> UTC Time: November 23, 2017 5:50 AM
> >>> From: antonio@vieiro.net
> >>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >>>Hi all,
> >>>Some comments inlined below
> >>>El 22/11/17 a las 23:26, Emilian Bold escribió:
> >>>>A NetBeans release supporting Java 9 seems of utmost importance in
> 2017.
> >>>>Fully agree. I'm not sure 2017 is feasible, though.
> >>>>Initially we could just carve-out the pieces we can't ship. It's
> >>>> unfortunate but not a roadblock for a Java developer not to have
> Hibernate
> >>>> tooling or a MySQL connector in NetBeans. In time we can move those to
> >>>> separate community (ie. non-Apache) plugins.
> >>>>>
> >>>>Definitely: I'd prefer starting as small as possible, and grow upon
> that
> >>> (and see how strong we are now during the process).
> >>>Regarding IDE modules, and as a wise man once said: "Either use an
> >>> Apache compatible license, adopt it, or get out of the way as a plugin
> >>> module(s) somewhere at github".
> >>>>I remember we had an open discussion with the Hibernate folks about
> >>>> relicensing some DTDs. Are we also using JARs from Hibernate?
> >>>>>Maybe we should look into the way our clusters are grouped. I don't
> see
> >>>> why the Java editor would have any kind of dependency on db.drivers.
> >>>>>We could make a tinyide cluster and put less modules in there and have
> >>>> the java cluster depend on tinyide and extide.
> >>>>>I'm not sure cluster reorganization is feasible if we want to release
> in
> >>>> 2017. If cluster reorganization is the way to go then maybe the sooner
> >>>> the better.
> >>>>But we may want to do that later on, and try to take JDK modules into
> >>> account. Clusters could be organized to require as less JDK modules as
> >>> possible. I'd love to see a "tiny platform cluster" run on top of
> >>> java.base only.
> >>>Un abrazo,
> >>> Antonio
> >>>>--emi
> >>>>
> >>>>>-------- Original Message --------
> >>>>> Subject: IDE release
> >>>>> Local Time: November 21, 2017 10:30 PM
> >>>>> UTC Time: November 21, 2017 8:30 PM
> >>>>> From: lahoda@gmail.com
> >>>>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we
> could
> >>>>> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released,
> >>>>> I'll
> >>>>>>change the release job:
> >>>>>https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator Projects/job/incubator-
> >>>>> netbeans-release/
> >>>>>>to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and
> run
> >>>>> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses"
> (which
> >>>>> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the
> >>>>> license
> >>>>>>file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses
> >>>>> manually,
> >>>>>>and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
> >>>>>https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
> >>>>> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need
> to
> >>>>> solve somehow besides javac:
> >>>>> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> >>>>> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> >>>>> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> >>>>> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> >>>>> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
> >>>>> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> >>>>> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate
> ones);
> >>>>> or
> >>>>>>on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big
> >>>>> enough to
> >>>>>>enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so
> >>>>> it
> >>>>>>will take some time to clean them up).
> >>>>> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at
> DEPENDENCIES
> >>>>> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense
> to
> >>>>> look
> >>>>>>at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses
> failures.)
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Jan
> >
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>.
I don't have any code yet but the idea is simple: just start excluding whole modules from the ide/java cluster.
You can make a fine Java IDE with Java 9 support even if you have no MySQL connector out of the box or other secondary features which would need more work otherwise.
--emi
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Re: IDE release
>Local Time: November 23, 2017 2:50 PM
>UTC Time: November 23, 2017 12:50 PM
>From: geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com
>To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org, Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>
>
>On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Emilian Bold emilian.bold@protonmail.ch
> wrote:
>>My point was that a cluster reorganization would help us release in 2017.
>>
>
>What would that reorganization look like and do feel free to submit a PR
> for evaluation.
>
> Gj
>
>
>
>
>>--emi
>>>-------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: IDE release
>>> Local Time: November 23, 2017 7:50 AM
>>> UTC Time: November 23, 2017 5:50 AM
>>> From: antonio@vieiro.net
>>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>>Hi all,
>>>Some comments inlined below
>>>El 22/11/17 a las 23:26, Emilian Bold escribió:
>>>>A NetBeans release supporting Java 9 seems of utmost importance in 2017.
>>>>Fully agree. I'm not sure 2017 is feasible, though.
>>>>Initially we could just carve-out the pieces we can't ship. It's
>>>> unfortunate but not a roadblock for a Java developer not to have Hibernate
>>>> tooling or a MySQL connector in NetBeans. In time we can move those to
>>>> separate community (ie. non-Apache) plugins.
>>>>>
>>>>Definitely: I'd prefer starting as small as possible, and grow upon that
>>> (and see how strong we are now during the process).
>>>Regarding IDE modules, and as a wise man once said: "Either use an
>>> Apache compatible license, adopt it, or get out of the way as a plugin
>>> module(s) somewhere at github".
>>>>I remember we had an open discussion with the Hibernate folks about
>>>> relicensing some DTDs. Are we also using JARs from Hibernate?
>>>>>Maybe we should look into the way our clusters are grouped. I don't see
>>>> why the Java editor would have any kind of dependency on db.drivers.
>>>>>We could make a tinyide cluster and put less modules in there and have
>>>> the java cluster depend on tinyide and extide.
>>>>>I'm not sure cluster reorganization is feasible if we want to release in
>>>> 2017. If cluster reorganization is the way to go then maybe the sooner
>>>> the better.
>>>>But we may want to do that later on, and try to take JDK modules into
>>> account. Clusters could be organized to require as less JDK modules as
>>> possible. I'd love to see a "tiny platform cluster" run on top of
>>> java.base only.
>>>Un abrazo,
>>> Antonio
>>>>--emi
>>>>
>>>>>-------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: IDE release
>>>>> Local Time: November 21, 2017 10:30 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: November 21, 2017 8:30 PM
>>>>> From: lahoda@gmail.com
>>>>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
>>>>> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released,
>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>change the release job:
>>>>>https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator Projects/job/incubator-
>>>>> netbeans-release/
>>>>>>to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
>>>>> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
>>>>> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the
>>>>> license
>>>>>>file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses
>>>>> manually,
>>>>>>and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
>>>>>https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>>>>> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
>>>>> solve somehow besides javac:
>>>>> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
>>>>> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
>>>>> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
>>>>> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
>>>>> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>>>>> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
>>>>> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones);
>>>>> or
>>>>>>on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big
>>>>> enough to
>>>>>>enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so
>>>>> it
>>>>>>will take some time to clean them up).
>>>>> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
>>>>> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to
>>>>> look
>>>>>>at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jan
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>
wrote:
> My point was that a cluster reorganization would help us release in 2017.
>
What would that reorganization look like and do feel free to submit a PR
for evaluation.
Gj
>
> --emi
>
> >-------- Original Message --------
> >Subject: Re: IDE release
> >Local Time: November 23, 2017 7:50 AM
> >UTC Time: November 23, 2017 5:50 AM
> >From: antonio@vieiro.net
> >To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >
> >Hi all,
> >
> > Some comments inlined below
> >
> > El 22/11/17 a las 23:26, Emilian Bold escribió:
> >>A NetBeans release supporting Java 9 seems of utmost importance in 2017.
> >>
> >Fully agree. I'm not sure 2017 is feasible, though.
> >>Initially we could just carve-out the pieces we can't ship. It's
> unfortunate but not a roadblock for a Java developer not to have Hibernate
> tooling or a MySQL connector in NetBeans. In time we can move those to
> separate community (ie. non-Apache) plugins.
> >>
> >Definitely: I'd prefer starting as small as possible, and grow upon that
> > (and see how strong we are now during the process).
> >
> > Regarding IDE modules, and as a wise man once said: "Either use an
> > Apache compatible license, adopt it, or get out of the way as a plugin
> > module(s) somewhere at github".
> >
> >>I remember we had an open discussion with the Hibernate folks about
> relicensing some DTDs. Are we also using JARs from Hibernate?
> >>Maybe we should look into the way our clusters are grouped. I don't see
> why the Java editor would have any kind of dependency on db.drivers.
> >>We could make a tinyide cluster and put less modules in there and have
> the java cluster depend on tinyide and extide.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure cluster reorganization is feasible if we want to release in
> >>2017. If cluster reorganization is the way to go then maybe the sooner
> > the better.
> >
> > But we may want to do that later on, and try to take JDK modules into
> > account. Clusters could be organized to require as less JDK modules as
> > possible. I'd love to see a "tiny platform cluster" run on top of
> > java.base only.
> >
> > Un abrazo,
> > Antonio
> >
> >>--emi
> >>
> >>>-------- Original Message --------
> >>> Subject: IDE release
> >>> Local Time: November 21, 2017 10:30 PM
> >>> UTC Time: November 21, 2017 8:30 PM
> >>> From: lahoda@gmail.com
> >>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >>>Hi,
> >>>I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
> >>> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released,
> I'll
> >>> change the release job:
> >>>https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator Projects/job/incubator-
> netbeans-release/
> >>>to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
> >>> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
> >>> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the
> license
> >>> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses
> manually,
> >>> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
> >>>https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
> >>>Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
> >>> solve somehow besides javac:
> >>> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> >>> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> >>> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> >>> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> >>> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
> >>>My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> >>> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones);
> or
> >>> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big
> enough to
> >>> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so
> it
> >>> will take some time to clean them up).
> >>>(When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
> >>> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to
> look
> >>> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
> >>>Thanks,
> >>> Jan
> >
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>.
My point was that a cluster reorganization would help us release in 2017.
--emi
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Re: IDE release
>Local Time: November 23, 2017 7:50 AM
>UTC Time: November 23, 2017 5:50 AM
>From: antonio@vieiro.net
>To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
>Hi all,
>
> Some comments inlined below
>
> El 22/11/17 a las 23:26, Emilian Bold escribió:
>>A NetBeans release supporting Java 9 seems of utmost importance in 2017.
>>
>Fully agree. I'm not sure 2017 is feasible, though.
>>Initially we could just carve-out the pieces we can't ship. It's unfortunate but not a roadblock for a Java developer not to have Hibernate tooling or a MySQL connector in NetBeans. In time we can move those to separate community (ie. non-Apache) plugins.
>>
>Definitely: I'd prefer starting as small as possible, and grow upon that
> (and see how strong we are now during the process).
>
> Regarding IDE modules, and as a wise man once said: "Either use an
> Apache compatible license, adopt it, or get out of the way as a plugin
> module(s) somewhere at github".
>
>>I remember we had an open discussion with the Hibernate folks about relicensing some DTDs. Are we also using JARs from Hibernate?
>>Maybe we should look into the way our clusters are grouped. I don't see why the Java editor would have any kind of dependency on db.drivers.
>>We could make a tinyide cluster and put less modules in there and have the java cluster depend on tinyide and extide.
>>
>> I'm not sure cluster reorganization is feasible if we want to release in
>>2017. If cluster reorganization is the way to go then maybe the sooner
> the better.
>
> But we may want to do that later on, and try to take JDK modules into
> account. Clusters could be organized to require as less JDK modules as
> possible. I'd love to see a "tiny platform cluster" run on top of
> java.base only.
>
> Un abrazo,
> Antonio
>
>>--emi
>>
>>>-------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: IDE release
>>> Local Time: November 21, 2017 10:30 PM
>>> UTC Time: November 21, 2017 8:30 PM
>>> From: lahoda@gmail.com
>>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>>Hi,
>>>I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
>>> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
>>> change the release job:
>>>https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>>>to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
>>> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
>>> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
>>> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
>>> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
>>>https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>>>Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
>>> solve somehow besides javac:
>>> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
>>> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
>>> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
>>> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
>>> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>>>My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
>>> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
>>> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
>>> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
>>> will take some time to clean them up).
>>>(When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
>>> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
>>> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>>>Thanks,
>>> Jan
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Antonio <an...@vieiro.net>.
Hi all,
Some comments inlined below
El 22/11/17 a las 23:26, Emilian Bold escribió:
> A NetBeans release supporting Java 9 seems of utmost importance in 2017.
>
Fully agree. I'm not sure 2017 is feasible, though.
> Initially we could just carve-out the pieces we can't ship. It's unfortunate but not a roadblock for a Java developer not to have Hibernate tooling or a MySQL connector in NetBeans. In time we can move those to separate community (ie. non-Apache) plugins.
>
Definitely: I'd prefer starting as small as possible, and grow upon that
(and see how strong we are now during the process).
Regarding IDE modules, and as a wise man once said: "Either use an
Apache compatible license, adopt it, or get out of the way as a plugin
module(s) somewhere at github".
> I remember we had an open discussion with the Hibernate folks about relicensing some DTDs. Are we also using JARs from Hibernate?
>
> Maybe we should look into the way our clusters are grouped. I don't see why the Java editor would have any kind of dependency on db.drivers.
>
> We could make a `tinyide` cluster and put less modules in there and have the java cluster depend on tinyide and extide.
I'm not sure cluster reorganization is feasible if we want to release in
2017. If cluster reorganization is the way to go then maybe the sooner
the better.
But we may want to do that later on, and try to take JDK modules into
account. Clusters could be organized to require as less JDK modules as
possible. I'd love to see a "tiny platform cluster" run on top of
java.base only.
Un abrazo,
Antonio
>
> --emi
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: IDE release
>> Local Time: November 21, 2017 10:30 PM
>> UTC Time: November 21, 2017 8:30 PM
>> From: lahoda@gmail.com
>> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
>> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
>> change the release job:
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>>
>> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
>> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
>> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
>> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
>> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>>
>> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
>> solve somehow besides javac:
>> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
>> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
>> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
>> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
>> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>>
>> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
>> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
>> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
>> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
>> will take some time to clean them up).
>>
>> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
>> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
>> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jan
Re: IDE release
Posted by Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>.
A NetBeans release supporting Java 9 seems of utmost importance in 2017.
Initially we could just carve-out the pieces we can't ship. It's unfortunate but not a roadblock for a Java developer not to have Hibernate tooling or a MySQL connector in NetBeans. In time we can move those to separate community (ie. non-Apache) plugins.
I remember we had an open discussion with the Hibernate folks about relicensing some DTDs. Are we also using JARs from Hibernate?
Maybe we should look into the way our clusters are grouped. I don't see why the Java editor would have any kind of dependency on db.drivers.
We could make a `tinyide` cluster and put less modules in there and have the java cluster depend on tinyide and extide.
--emi
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: IDE release
>Local Time: November 21, 2017 10:30 PM
>UTC Time: November 21, 2017 8:30 PM
>From: lahoda@gmail.com
>To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
>Hi,
>
> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
> change the release job:
>https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
>https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>
> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
> solve somehow besides javac:
> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>
> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
> will take some time to clean them up).
>
> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
Re: IDE release
Posted by Sven Reimers <sv...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
I would assume it should be possible to build both - the JavaIDE and a
generic IDE at the same time.
If we can get the GenericStuff working faster than the JavaIDE - we could
decide to release that first.
Sven
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:18 PM, John McDonnell <mc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Is there a way that we could look at doing both?
>
> i.e. In parallel do the generic IDE and look at how we do the Plugin
> Manager/Portal.
>
> Once those are completed we could branch off the Generic
> Modules/Plugin Manager and then Release this branch.
>
> From there, we could work to get the Java and other clusters released
> as plugins (hence the need to looking at the Plugin Manager/Portal
> previously), so that we can release new plugins but also update the
> Website with new versions of the IDE to download?
>
> Or does this take us away from the idea of an Apache Release, that's
> voted on, etc...?
>
> Regards
>
> John
>
> On 21 November 2017 at 21:12, Geertjan Wielenga
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Very valid points. Very hard to argue against this perspective.
> >
> > Though note that focusing on a neutral-IDE first doesn’t necessarily mean
> > slowing the process down. Just a different approach to the same end and
> > whether it would end up taking longer or not is not predetermined.
> >
> > Gj
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 22:03, John McDonnell <mc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> From a personal standpoint, I'd like to see a Java IDE as soon as
> >> possible. I know there's still a lot of work to get there, but to
> >> release a generic IDE, after a Platform release means we'll have done
> >> 2 releases (Ignoring the HTML releases that are happening) that still
> >> isn't at the state that most users of NetBeans (I assume) can use...
> >>
> >> This process started in late 2016, the last Oracle supported
> >> release(8.2) was late 2016 as well. We've gone nearly a year without
> >> a Java IDE release in the NetBeans family (NetBeans/Apache NetBeans),
> >> if we don't see an actual release that developers out there can use,
> >> that supports Java 9 soon then I think this would hurt the NetBeans
> >> userbase. As developers moving to Java 9, will move to IntelliJ and
> >> Eclipse before considering NetBeans as there simply isn't an IDE
> >> release capable to support Java 9 to use right now. Anyone looking
> >> for the latest most up to date IDE just right now wouldn't be looking
> >> at NetBeans, and we need to change this and get back into the
> >> conversation, and a Java IDE release sooner rather than later imo will
> >> help this...
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 21 November 2017 at 20:39, Dmitry Avtonomov
> >> <dm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > That is a very good idea, Gj!
> >> >
> >> > From: Geertjan Wielenga
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:37
> >> > To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >> > Subject: Re: IDE release
> >> >
> >> > A related question: maybe we should move to the “ide” cluster first
> and
> >> > forget about anything language-specific, including Java, until we have
> >> > released the generic non-language specific IDE features?
> >> >
> >> > Or, as a counter argument, would that not be significant enough to
> >> justify
> >> > its own process?
> >> >
> >> > From the usage point of view, having a generic platform is great and
> in
> >> the
> >> > same way a generic IDE could be great too, before looking at a
> >> > Java-or-any-specific-language IDE?
> >> >
> >> > As a side effect, this would raise the profile of this part of Apache
> >> > NetBeans.
> >> >
> >> > Just some thoughts on next steps, happy to back away from them if
> others
> >> > disagree or show that I misunderstood something.
> >> >
> >> > Gj
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:30, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we
> could
> >> >> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released,
> >> I'll
> >> >> change the release job:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> incubator-netbeans-release/
> >> >>
> >> >> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and
> run
> >> >> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses"
> (which
> >> >> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the
> >> license
> >> >> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses
> manually,
> >> >> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
> >> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
> >> >>
> >> >> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need
> to
> >> >> solve somehow besides javac:
> >> >> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> >> >> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> >> >> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> >> >> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> >> >> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
> >> >>
> >> >> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> >> >> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate
> ones);
> >> or
> >> >> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big
> >> enough to
> >> >> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them,
> so it
> >> >> will take some time to clean them up).
> >> >>
> >> >> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at
> DEPENDENCIES
> >> >> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense
> to
> >> look
> >> >> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses
> failures.)
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Jan
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
>
--
Sven Reimers
* Senior Expert Software Architect
* Java Champion
* NetBeans Dream Team Member: http://dreamteam.netbeans.org
* Community Leader NetBeans: http://community.java.net/netbeans
Desktop Java:
http://community.java.net/javadesktop
* JUG Leader JUG Bodensee: http://www.jug-bodensee.de
* Duke's Choice Award Winner 2009
* XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Sven_Reimers8
* LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/svenreimers
Re: IDE release
Posted by John McDonnell <mc...@gmail.com>.
Is there a way that we could look at doing both?
i.e. In parallel do the generic IDE and look at how we do the Plugin
Manager/Portal.
Once those are completed we could branch off the Generic
Modules/Plugin Manager and then Release this branch.
From there, we could work to get the Java and other clusters released
as plugins (hence the need to looking at the Plugin Manager/Portal
previously), so that we can release new plugins but also update the
Website with new versions of the IDE to download?
Or does this take us away from the idea of an Apache Release, that's
voted on, etc...?
Regards
John
On 21 November 2017 at 21:12, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Very valid points. Very hard to argue against this perspective.
>
> Though note that focusing on a neutral-IDE first doesn’t necessarily mean
> slowing the process down. Just a different approach to the same end and
> whether it would end up taking longer or not is not predetermined.
>
> Gj
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 22:03, John McDonnell <mc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> From a personal standpoint, I'd like to see a Java IDE as soon as
>> possible. I know there's still a lot of work to get there, but to
>> release a generic IDE, after a Platform release means we'll have done
>> 2 releases (Ignoring the HTML releases that are happening) that still
>> isn't at the state that most users of NetBeans (I assume) can use...
>>
>> This process started in late 2016, the last Oracle supported
>> release(8.2) was late 2016 as well. We've gone nearly a year without
>> a Java IDE release in the NetBeans family (NetBeans/Apache NetBeans),
>> if we don't see an actual release that developers out there can use,
>> that supports Java 9 soon then I think this would hurt the NetBeans
>> userbase. As developers moving to Java 9, will move to IntelliJ and
>> Eclipse before considering NetBeans as there simply isn't an IDE
>> release capable to support Java 9 to use right now. Anyone looking
>> for the latest most up to date IDE just right now wouldn't be looking
>> at NetBeans, and we need to change this and get back into the
>> conversation, and a Java IDE release sooner rather than later imo will
>> help this...
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21 November 2017 at 20:39, Dmitry Avtonomov
>> <dm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > That is a very good idea, Gj!
>> >
>> > From: Geertjan Wielenga
>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:37
>> > To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: IDE release
>> >
>> > A related question: maybe we should move to the “ide” cluster first and
>> > forget about anything language-specific, including Java, until we have
>> > released the generic non-language specific IDE features?
>> >
>> > Or, as a counter argument, would that not be significant enough to
>> justify
>> > its own process?
>> >
>> > From the usage point of view, having a generic platform is great and in
>> the
>> > same way a generic IDE could be great too, before looking at a
>> > Java-or-any-specific-language IDE?
>> >
>> > As a side effect, this would raise the profile of this part of Apache
>> > NetBeans.
>> >
>> > Just some thoughts on next steps, happy to back away from them if others
>> > disagree or show that I misunderstood something.
>> >
>> > Gj
>> >
>> > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:30, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
>> >> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released,
>> I'll
>> >> change the release job:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>> >>
>> >> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
>> >> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
>> >> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the
>> license
>> >> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
>> >> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
>> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>> >>
>> >> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
>> >> solve somehow besides javac:
>> >> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
>> >> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
>> >> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
>> >> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
>> >> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>> >>
>> >> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
>> >> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones);
>> or
>> >> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big
>> enough to
>> >> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
>> >> will take some time to clean them up).
>> >>
>> >> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
>> >> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to
>> look
>> >> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Jan
>> >>
>> >
>>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Very valid points. Very hard to argue against this perspective.
Though note that focusing on a neutral-IDE first doesn’t necessarily mean
slowing the process down. Just a different approach to the same end and
whether it would end up taking longer or not is not predetermined.
Gj
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 22:03, John McDonnell <mc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> From a personal standpoint, I'd like to see a Java IDE as soon as
> possible. I know there's still a lot of work to get there, but to
> release a generic IDE, after a Platform release means we'll have done
> 2 releases (Ignoring the HTML releases that are happening) that still
> isn't at the state that most users of NetBeans (I assume) can use...
>
> This process started in late 2016, the last Oracle supported
> release(8.2) was late 2016 as well. We've gone nearly a year without
> a Java IDE release in the NetBeans family (NetBeans/Apache NetBeans),
> if we don't see an actual release that developers out there can use,
> that supports Java 9 soon then I think this would hurt the NetBeans
> userbase. As developers moving to Java 9, will move to IntelliJ and
> Eclipse before considering NetBeans as there simply isn't an IDE
> release capable to support Java 9 to use right now. Anyone looking
> for the latest most up to date IDE just right now wouldn't be looking
> at NetBeans, and we need to change this and get back into the
> conversation, and a Java IDE release sooner rather than later imo will
> help this...
>
>
> Regards
>
> John
>
>
>
> On 21 November 2017 at 20:39, Dmitry Avtonomov
> <dm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That is a very good idea, Gj!
> >
> > From: Geertjan Wielenga
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:37
> > To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: IDE release
> >
> > A related question: maybe we should move to the “ide” cluster first and
> > forget about anything language-specific, including Java, until we have
> > released the generic non-language specific IDE features?
> >
> > Or, as a counter argument, would that not be significant enough to
> justify
> > its own process?
> >
> > From the usage point of view, having a generic platform is great and in
> the
> > same way a generic IDE could be great too, before looking at a
> > Java-or-any-specific-language IDE?
> >
> > As a side effect, this would raise the profile of this part of Apache
> > NetBeans.
> >
> > Just some thoughts on next steps, happy to back away from them if others
> > disagree or show that I misunderstood something.
> >
> > Gj
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:30, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
> >> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released,
> I'll
> >> change the release job:
> >>
> >>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
> >>
> >> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
> >> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
> >> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the
> license
> >> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
> >> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
> >>
> >> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
> >> solve somehow besides javac:
> >> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> >> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> >> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> >> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> >> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
> >>
> >> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> >> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones);
> or
> >> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big
> enough to
> >> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
> >> will take some time to clean them up).
> >>
> >> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
> >> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to
> look
> >> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jan
> >>
> >
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by John McDonnell <mc...@gmail.com>.
From a personal standpoint, I'd like to see a Java IDE as soon as
possible. I know there's still a lot of work to get there, but to
release a generic IDE, after a Platform release means we'll have done
2 releases (Ignoring the HTML releases that are happening) that still
isn't at the state that most users of NetBeans (I assume) can use...
This process started in late 2016, the last Oracle supported
release(8.2) was late 2016 as well. We've gone nearly a year without
a Java IDE release in the NetBeans family (NetBeans/Apache NetBeans),
if we don't see an actual release that developers out there can use,
that supports Java 9 soon then I think this would hurt the NetBeans
userbase. As developers moving to Java 9, will move to IntelliJ and
Eclipse before considering NetBeans as there simply isn't an IDE
release capable to support Java 9 to use right now. Anyone looking
for the latest most up to date IDE just right now wouldn't be looking
at NetBeans, and we need to change this and get back into the
conversation, and a Java IDE release sooner rather than later imo will
help this...
Regards
John
On 21 November 2017 at 20:39, Dmitry Avtonomov
<dm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is a very good idea, Gj!
>
> From: Geertjan Wielenga
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:37
> To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IDE release
>
> A related question: maybe we should move to the “ide” cluster first and
> forget about anything language-specific, including Java, until we have
> released the generic non-language specific IDE features?
>
> Or, as a counter argument, would that not be significant enough to justify
> its own process?
>
> From the usage point of view, having a generic platform is great and in the
> same way a generic IDE could be great too, before looking at a
> Java-or-any-specific-language IDE?
>
> As a side effect, this would raise the profile of this part of Apache
> NetBeans.
>
> Just some thoughts on next steps, happy to back away from them if others
> disagree or show that I misunderstood something.
>
> Gj
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:30, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
>> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
>> change the release job:
>>
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>>
>> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
>> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
>> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
>> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
>> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>>
>> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
>> solve somehow besides javac:
>> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
>> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
>> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
>> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
>> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>>
>> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
>> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
>> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
>> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
>> will take some time to clean them up).
>>
>> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
>> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
>> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jan
>>
>
RE: IDE release
Posted by Dmitry Avtonomov <dm...@gmail.com>.
That is a very good idea, Gj!
From: Geertjan Wielenga
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:37
To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: IDE release
A related question: maybe we should move to the “ide” cluster first and
forget about anything language-specific, including Java, until we have
released the generic non-language specific IDE features?
Or, as a counter argument, would that not be significant enough to justify
its own process?
From the usage point of view, having a generic platform is great and in the
same way a generic IDE could be great too, before looking at a
Java-or-any-specific-language IDE?
As a side effect, this would raise the profile of this part of Apache
NetBeans.
Just some thoughts on next steps, happy to back away from them if others
disagree or show that I misunderstood something.
Gj
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:30, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
> change the release job:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>
> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
> solve somehow besides javac:
> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>
> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
> will take some time to clean them up).
>
> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
>
Re: IDE release
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
A related question: maybe we should move to the “ide” cluster first and
forget about anything language-specific, including Java, until we have
released the generic non-language specific IDE features?
Or, as a counter argument, would that not be significant enough to justify
its own process?
From the usage point of view, having a generic platform is great and in the
same way a generic IDE could be great too, before looking at a
Java-or-any-specific-language IDE?
As a side effect, this would raise the profile of this part of Apache
NetBeans.
Just some thoughts on next steps, happy to back away from them if others
disagree or show that I misunderstood something.
Gj
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:30, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I assume we should work on getting the code into a state where we could
> release a (beta) of (Java) IDE. When the platform/alpha is released, I'll
> change the release job:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> to build the IDE (I'll let it build platform separately as well) and run
> the appropriate tests, including "ant verify-libs-and-licenses" (which
> checks that every external binary has a license file, and that the license
> file passes some basic checks). I ran verify-libs-and-licenses manually,
> and there is (unsurprisingly) a lot of failures. I fixed a few here:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/285
>
> Among other problems there are several (L)GPL libraries we will need to
> solve somehow besides javac:
> db.drivers/external/mysql-connector-java-5.1.23-license.txt
> hibernate4lib/external/hibernate-4.3.1-lib-license.txt
> libs.jshell.compile/external/nb-jshell-license.txt
> (presumably compile-time only at this time)
> o.jdesktop.beansbinding/external/beansbinding-1.2.1-license.txt
>
> My question is whether someone would be willing to work on the GPL
> libraries (I personally know very little about the db+hibernate ones); or
> on cleaning up the verify-and-licenses (I don't think this is big enough to
> enter the violations into a wiki, but there's quite a few of them, so it
> will take some time to clean them up).
>
> (When verify-libs-and-licenses is clean, we need to look at DEPENDENCIES
> and fix any problems we spot, but I don't think it makes much sense to look
> at that when there are significant verify-libs-and-licenses failures.)
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
>