You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@netbeans.apache.org by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com> on 2017/10/31 12:52:53 UTC
Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Hi all,
We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a range
of different people:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
To dos:
1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look at
the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to get
it done:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/List+of+Modules+to+Review
2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp and
SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re JavaHelp,
while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to get
rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is and
fixing where needed.
4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
- Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
- Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
- Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
we're currently working on.
Comments and feedback welcome,
Geertjan
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
>> ...Note that a first release has been approved by the Incubator PMC already..
> ...That is one repo of Apache NetBeans -- and not Apache NetBeans itself,
> i.e., the incubator-netbeans-html4j repo is more or less separate from
> incubator-netbeans...
Understood. In terms of process that doesn't make a difference, once
the podling demonstrates that it knows how to make releases, exactly
what is released does not matter from the Incubator's point of view.
-Bertrand
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > ...4. Plan a first Apache release...
>
> Note that a first release has been approved by the Incubator PMC already
> [1]
>
That is one repo of Apache NetBeans -- and not Apache NetBeans itself,
i.e., the incubator-netbeans-html4j repo is more or less separate from
incubator-netbeans.
Gj
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ...4. Plan a first Apache release...
Note that a first release has been approved by the Incubator PMC already [1]
IMO the next steps are to:
-Promote it to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/netbeans/
-[announce] it on the dev list
-Mention it on a downloads page under http://netbeans.apache.org/
-Write a "how to release" guide based on this experience.
I'm not planning to do any of this myself, just looking over the
PPMC's shoulders ;-)
-Bertrand
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8949ec2a9d2dbb40a53f146a7aecdc24acfb4a9be0405c69662862db@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Antonio Vieiro <an...@vieiro.net>.
Geertjan,
Thanks for this. For me it’s important to know what’s being done, the reasons why and what’s next to do.
I think this should be posted in the NetBeans blog too. This is public information that many users may be eager to see, how the project evolves and that it is in good shape. Marketing stuff everybody will welcome ;-).
The LLVM guys have a weekly newsletter at [1]. I’m not involved in LLVM at all (but who knows) but I love reading their weekly newsletter. Maybe we want to post something like that as well.
Un abrazo,
Antonio
[1] http://llvmweekly.org
> El 31 oct 2017, a las 13:52, Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com> escribió:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a range
> of different people:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
>
> To dos:
>
> 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look at
> the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to get
> it done:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/List+of+Modules+to+Review
>
> 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
>
> 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp and
> SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re JavaHelp,
> while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to get
> rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is and
> fixing where needed.
>
> 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
> modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
> the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
> not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
> i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>
> 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
>
> 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> we're currently working on.
>
> Comments and feedback welcome,
>
> Geertjan
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Jesse Glick <ty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There was a significant time between the snapshot for the donation was
> made
> > and the donation actually happened. That's unfortunate, but I don't think
> > anybody here could do anything about that (Geertjan tried, AFAIK).
>
> To be clear, I have no problem with that decision. I am just
> suggesting that it be clearly communicated somewhere prominent.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/README.md
>
> for example could note the last-synchronized Mercurial revision and
> explain the potential implications for contributors. (At least until
> automated synchronization is up and running, or the relevant portions
> of the Mercurial repository are officially closed.)
>
Sure, makes sense, will do.
Gj
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jesse Glick <ty...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There was a significant time between the snapshot for the donation was made
> and the donation actually happened. That's unfortunate, but I don't think
> anybody here could do anything about that (Geertjan tried, AFAIK).
To be clear, I have no problem with that decision. I am just
suggesting that it be clearly communicated somewhere prominent.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/README.md
for example could note the last-synchronized Mercurial revision and
explain the potential implications for contributors. (At least until
automated synchronization is up and running, or the relevant portions
of the Mercurial repository are officially closed.)
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Well, it's something that's being worked on from the Oracle side, we'll
keep everyone updated re this.
At the same time, it's not an urgent item right now at this stage -- what
is urgent and what we need to be narrowly focused on is that we need to
wrap things up (Apache Rat, GPL-ed binaries) and do the 1st Apache NetBeans
release for initially the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform.
Gj
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 01.11.2017, 13:16 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ...To the best of my knowledge, getting the changes (for donated
> > > modules) from
> > > hg.nb.org to the incubator-netbeans repository is a work in
> > > progress...
> >
> > I don't know how many changes this represents, but IMO the simplest
> > way to bring them here is to have their authors contribute them again
> > to Apache NetBeans.
> >
>
> to know the extend of the problem, it would be good to know which
> mercurial revision the donation was build from. From there the
> changesets could be traced, that touched the donated modules and thus a
> list could be created.
>
> This assumes, that the donation was create from one of the core
> repositories.
>
> Can this be done?
>
> Thanks
>
> Matthias
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com>.
AFAIK, the zip was created from the donation_review branch on the
http://hg.netbeans.org/releases repository. IIRC, the branch was originally
branched from default sometime in December last year, but then was updated
with default branch changes sometime in April. If I am looking right, the
last common changeset is "426cf49d9cea9fb8ffc4ac63b87ea6a4a6e08196":
$ hg debugancestor donation_review default
303705:426cf49d9cea9fb8ffc4ac63b87ea6a4a6e08196
So we are talking about changes between this changeset and the tip of the
default branch (in either the releases repository, or the jet-main
repository, these should be mostly in synch if all goes well).
Jan
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 01.11.2017, 13:16 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > ...To the best of my knowledge, getting the changes (for donated
> > > modules) from
> > > hg.nb.org to the incubator-netbeans repository is a work in
> > > progress...
> >
> > I don't know how many changes this represents, but IMO the simplest
> > way to bring them here is to have their authors contribute them again
> > to Apache NetBeans.
> >
>
> to know the extend of the problem, it would be good to know which
> mercurial revision the donation was build from. From there the
> changesets could be traced, that touched the donated modules and thus a
> list could be created.
>
> This assumes, that the donation was create from one of the core
> repositories.
>
> Can this be done?
>
> Thanks
>
> Matthias
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hey,
Am Mittwoch, den 01.11.2017, 13:16 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
>
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...To the best of my knowledge, getting the changes (for donated
> > modules) from
> > hg.nb.org to the incubator-netbeans repository is a work in
> > progress...
>
> I don't know how many changes this represents, but IMO the simplest
> way to bring them here is to have their authors contribute them again
> to Apache NetBeans.
>
to know the extend of the problem, it would be good to know which
mercurial revision the donation was build from. From there the
changesets could be traced, that touched the donated modules and thus a
list could be created.
This assumes, that the donation was create from one of the core
repositories.
Can this be done?
Thanks
Matthias
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...To the best of my knowledge, getting the changes (for donated modules) from
> hg.nb.org to the incubator-netbeans repository is a work in progress...
I don't know how many changes this represents, but IMO the simplest
way to bring them here is to have their authors contribute them again
to Apache NetBeans.
-Bertrand
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com>.
There was a significant time between the snapshot for the donation was made
and the donation actually happened. That's unfortunate, but I don't think
anybody here could do anything about that (Geertjan tried, AFAIK).
So, basically, during the gap, people could either work on the original
repository, work somewhere "aside" or not work at all. Many folks decided
to continue on the original repo, and I don't think that was a wrong
decision. And that continues a little bit even after the donation, as the
new patches may need to be based on the patches that are only in the
original repo.
To the best of my knowledge, getting the changes (for donated modules) from
hg.nb.org to the incubator-netbeans repository is a work in progress, both
process and work wise. But this is likely take some time before fully
completed.
Jan
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu
> wrote:
> Hey Jessie,
>
> Am Dienstag, den 31.10.2017, 20:23 -0400 schrieb Jesse Glick:
> > I ask because there appear to be at least some divergent changes. For
> > example,
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/commits/master/jshell.su
> > pport/src/org/netbeans/modules/jshell/support/ShellSession.java
> >
> > does not include
> >
> > http://hg.netbeans.org/main-silver/rev/fcaaa60addf7
>
> yes this is a big problem IMHO and I already raised it here.
>
> It seems nobody made sure, that changes are no longer done to the
> already donated modules.
>
> I understood this mail thread, that oracle would also follow the
> strategy and not modify the donated modules:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@netbeans.apache.org:
> lte=4M:Closing/Switch%20read-only%20hg.netbeans.org
>
> The referenced changeset shows that this is not the case.
>
> Geertjan: you are most probably best involved in the plans of oracle
> regarding this - how will this be handled?
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hey Jessie,
Am Dienstag, den 31.10.2017, 20:23 -0400 schrieb Jesse Glick:
> I ask because there appear to be at least some divergent changes. For
> example,
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/commits/master/jshell.su
> pport/src/org/netbeans/modules/jshell/support/ShellSession.java
>
> does not include
>
> http://hg.netbeans.org/main-silver/rev/fcaaa60addf7
yes this is a big problem IMHO and I already raised it here.
It seems nobody made sure, that changes are no longer done to the
already donated modules.
I understood this mail thread, that oracle would also follow the
strategy and not modify the donated modules:
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@netbeans.apache.org:lte=4M:Closing/Switch%20read-only%20hg.netbeans.org
The referenced changeset shows that this is not the case.
Geertjan: you are most probably best involved in the plans of oracle
regarding this - how will this be handled?
Greetings
Matthias
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jesse Glick <ty...@gmail.com>.
So, at this point, what is the repository of record for ongoing
development of that subset of NetBeans included in the initial
contribution? I mean real functional changes, not licensing or build
stuff.
Maybe I am missing some very obvious FAQ (and I surely missed prior
discussions), but I looked in
http://netbeans.apache.org/
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/NetBeans+Transition+Process
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/How+to+Participate
and none appear to say definitively.
I ask because there appear to be at least some divergent changes. For example,
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/commits/master/jshell.support/src/org/netbeans/modules/jshell/support/ShellSession.java
does not include
http://hg.netbeans.org/main-silver/rev/fcaaa60addf7
There seem to be bigger differences, too; for example
`org.openide.windows.ModeSelector` dates back to May in Mercurial, yet
seems to be absent from Git. If you simply check Tools » Plugins »
Updates on a fresh build you see that there are a bunch of updates
coming from the original UC servers; and these of course only show
changes which happened to involve bumping some
`OpenIDE-Module-Specification-Version`.
So is the code drop based on some very old snapshot? This is not
encouraging to developers who want to make sure changes they spend
time working on are sent to the “right” fork. If some divergence is
indeed deliberate, this ought to be called out somewhere prominent.
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Emilian Bold <em...@protonmail.ch>.
I agree with the plan for a first Apache release. NetBeans Platform first, then the rest.
--emi
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
>Local Time: October 31, 2017 2:52 PM
>UTC Time: October 31, 2017 12:52 PM
>From: geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com
>To: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
>Hi all,
>
> We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a range
> of different people:
>
>https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
>
> To dos:
>1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look at
> the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to get
> it done:
>
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/List+of+Modules+to+Review
>2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
>3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp and
> SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re JavaHelp,
> while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to get
> rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is and
> fixing where needed.
>4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
> modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
> the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
> not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
> i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
>6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> we're currently working on.
>
> Comments and feedback welcome,
>
> Geertjan
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Several more pull requests now -- people are needed to review them, no
special skills needed, no deep knowledge, no committer rights, no nothing
-- just pick a few pull requests and leave comments about whether they make
sense, i.e., evaluate the changes proposed (mostly simply license headers
added/changed) in the below:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pulls
All that's needed is a few comments for each of the pull requests or a
simple +1 if you agree with the proposed changes.
Gj
On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The following PRs all relate to the platform cluster, i.e., this is an
> attempt to help the build pass/be blue:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/221
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/222
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/223
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/224
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/225
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/226
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/227
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gj
>
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts, for the
>> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incu
>> bator-netbeans-release/
>>
>> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>>
>> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
>> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the release
>> vote e-mail.
>>
>> The checks performed are:
>> -rat
>> -ant verify-libs-and-licenses (checks consistency between -licence.txt
>> files, binaries and nbbuild/licenses; IMO this is one of the
>> pre-requisities to have a trustworthy DEPENDENCIES file)
>>
>> The job builds both the source (to-be-release) zip and a convenience
>> binary.
>>
>> Please note that I've just submitted two PR that fix (or "fix") some of
>> the
>> problems:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/216
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/215
>>
>> Feedback is welcome.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jan
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
>> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and
>> have
>> > IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a
>> range
>> > of different people:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
>> >
>> > To dos:
>> >
>> > 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the
>> sooner
>> > we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat
>> exclusions,
>> > the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look
>> at
>> > the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to
>> get
>> > it done:
>> >
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
>> > List+of+Modules+to+Review
>> >
>> > 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
>> > i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
>> > we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
>> > requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
>> >
>> > 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms
>> of
>> > the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp
>> and
>> > SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re
>> JavaHelp,
>> > while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to
>> get
>> > rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is
>> and
>> > fixing where needed.
>> >
>> > 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
>> >
>> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the
>> core
>> > modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked
>> through
>> > the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
>> > JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe
>> SwingX is
>> > not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
>> >
>> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans
>> Git,
>> > i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
>> > there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
>> >
>> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
>> > This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>> >
>> > 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
>> > NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
>> >
>> > 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
>> > Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
>> > we're currently working on.
>> >
>> > Comments and feedback welcome,
>> >
>> > Geertjan
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
The following PRs all relate to the platform cluster, i.e., this is an
attempt to help the build pass/be blue:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/221
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/222
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/223
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/224
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/225
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/226
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/227
Thanks,
Gj
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts, for the
> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>
> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the release
> vote e-mail.
>
> The checks performed are:
> -rat
> -ant verify-libs-and-licenses (checks consistency between -licence.txt
> files, binaries and nbbuild/licenses; IMO this is one of the
> pre-requisities to have a trustworthy DEPENDENCIES file)
>
> The job builds both the source (to-be-release) zip and a convenience
> binary.
>
> Please note that I've just submitted two PR that fix (or "fix") some of the
> problems:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/216
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/215
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> > IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a
> range
> > of different people:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
> >
> > To dos:
> >
> > 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> > we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> > the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look
> at
> > the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to
> get
> > it done:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> > List+of+Modules+to+Review
> >
> > 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> > i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> > we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> > requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
> >
> > 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> > the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp
> and
> > SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re
> JavaHelp,
> > while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to
> get
> > rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is
> and
> > fixing where needed.
> >
> > 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the
> core
> > modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked
> through
> > the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> > JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX
> is
> > not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans
> Git,
> > i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> > there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> > This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
> >
> > 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> > NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
> >
> > 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> > Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> > we're currently working on.
> >
> > Comments and feedback welcome,
> >
> > Geertjan
> >
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Sven Reimers <sv...@gmail.com>.
Awesome.
PR's look good to me.
Sven
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts, for the
> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>
> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the release
> vote e-mail.
>
> The checks performed are:
> -rat
> -ant verify-libs-and-licenses (checks consistency between -licence.txt
> files, binaries and nbbuild/licenses; IMO this is one of the
> pre-requisities to have a trustworthy DEPENDENCIES file)
>
> The job builds both the source (to-be-release) zip and a convenience
> binary.
>
> Please note that I've just submitted two PR that fix (or "fix") some of the
> problems:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/216
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/215
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> > IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a
> range
> > of different people:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
> >
> > To dos:
> >
> > 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> > we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> > the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look
> at
> > the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to
> get
> > it done:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> > List+of+Modules+to+Review
> >
> > 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> > i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> > we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> > requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
> >
> > 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> > the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp
> and
> > SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re
> JavaHelp,
> > while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to
> get
> > rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is
> and
> > fixing where needed.
> >
> > 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the
> core
> > modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked
> through
> > the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> > JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX
> is
> > not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans
> Git,
> > i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> > there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> > This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
> >
> > 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> > NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
> >
> > 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> > Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> > we're currently working on.
> >
> > Comments and feedback welcome,
> >
> > Geertjan
> >
>
--
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: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...As Geertjan says, this is about a platform-only "alpha" release. I
> personally think it is important that we try the Apache release process, to
> find out what we are doing right and what not....
+1, from an Incubator point of view releases from podlings do not have
to be technically perfect, alpha quality is fine.
-Bertrand
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Excellent. As soon as these two items are resolved in one way or another,
not necessarily perfectly at this point, let’s put the vote thread together
for the Apache incubator release of Apache NetBeans 9 Alpha, i.e., for the
modules making up the NetBeans Platform.
Gj
On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 at 08:54, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was looking at the DEPENDENCIES file, and:
> -APITest is miscategorized as a runtime dependency (should be trivial to
> fix, I'll do that tonight)
> -JavaHelp is not resolved Jarda had some patch (Jarda, what is the status),
> I has as well (requires API change), but one possibility would be to simply
> remove javahelp from the platform for now.
>
> Jan
>
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Matthias,
> >
> > As Geertjan says, this is about a platform-only "alpha" release. I
> > personally think it is important that we try the Apache release process,
> to
> > find out what we are doing right and what not. I think that having
> > problems/bugs in an alpha/beta release is expected, and since the
> donation
> > was not done from a released version of NB, there will probably be other
> > bugs in addition to the donation-related bugs.
> >
> > To find out what was changed for the donation, it should be possible to
> > inspect the original mercurial repository - the donation was done from
> > branch donation_review in the http://hg.netbeans.org/releases
> repository.
> >
> > Jan
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
> > mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey,
> >>
> >> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> >> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
> >> > > for the
> >> > > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> >> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> >> > > incubator-netbeans-release/
> >> > >
> >> > > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
> >> > >
> >> > > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> >> > > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
> >> > > release
> >> > > vote e-mail.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
> >> > specifically, and
> >> > narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
> >> >
> >> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
> >> > beans-release/57/
> >> >
> >> > That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
> >>
> >> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
> >> came with important files removed. One such example was the
> >> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
> >> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
> >>
> >> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
> >> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
> >> and fix them.
> >>
> >> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
> >> would not release at this point.
> >>
> >> Greetings
> >>
> >> Matthias
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com>.
I was looking at the DEPENDENCIES file, and:
-APITest is miscategorized as a runtime dependency (should be trivial to
fix, I'll do that tonight)
-JavaHelp is not resolved Jarda had some patch (Jarda, what is the status),
I has as well (requires API change), but one possibility would be to simply
remove javahelp from the platform for now.
Jan
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> As Geertjan says, this is about a platform-only "alpha" release. I
> personally think it is important that we try the Apache release process, to
> find out what we are doing right and what not. I think that having
> problems/bugs in an alpha/beta release is expected, and since the donation
> was not done from a released version of NB, there will probably be other
> bugs in addition to the donation-related bugs.
>
> To find out what was changed for the donation, it should be possible to
> inspect the original mercurial repository - the donation was done from
> branch donation_review in the http://hg.netbeans.org/releases repository.
>
> Jan
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
> mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
>> > > for the
>> > > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
>> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>> > > incubator-netbeans-release/
>> > >
>> > > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>> > >
>> > > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
>> > > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
>> > > release
>> > > vote e-mail.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
>> > specifically, and
>> > narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
>> >
>> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
>> > beans-release/57/
>> >
>> > That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>>
>> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
>> came with important files removed. One such example was the
>> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
>> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>>
>> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
>> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
>> and fix them.
>>
>> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
>> would not release at this point.
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com>.
Hi Matthias,
As Geertjan says, this is about a platform-only "alpha" release. I
personally think it is important that we try the Apache release process, to
find out what we are doing right and what not. I think that having
problems/bugs in an alpha/beta release is expected, and since the donation
was not done from a released version of NB, there will probably be other
bugs in addition to the donation-related bugs.
To find out what was changed for the donation, it should be possible to
inspect the original mercurial repository - the donation was done from
branch donation_review in the http://hg.netbeans.org/releases repository.
Jan
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
> > > for the
> > > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> > > incubator-netbeans-release/
> > >
> > > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
> > >
> > > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> > > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
> > > release
> > > vote e-mail.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
> > specifically, and
> > narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
> >
> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
> > beans-release/57/
> >
> > That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>
> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
> came with important files removed. One such example was the
> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>
> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
> and fix them.
>
> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
> would not release at this point.
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>
Re: Branding opportunity (was Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for
Apache NetBeans)
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
I agree though it's a question of 'when' not 'if'.
Not sure in terms of timing when would be most strategic.
Gj
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Antonio <an...@vieiro.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was thinking that this is a great opportunity for branding and/or
> renaming the platform, making emphasis that the platform is IDE agnostic,
> and that it can be used to build any sort of desktop applications.
>
> For instance, we could name the platform as "Apache NetBeans Platform"
> (ANP), or "Apache NetBeans Application Platform" (ANAP), or "Apache
> NetBeans Desktop Application Platform" (ANDAP), or "Apache NetBeans Awesome
> Platform for building Flipping Modular Desktop Applications" (ANAPFMDA), or
> whatever, instead of just "Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha".
>
> The object being to make it clear that you can use the NetBeans Platform
> to build any kind of applications, not just IDEs, and making it clear that
> Apache NetBeans is much more than an IDE.
>
> Choosing a name that is easy to find in search engines would be a plus.
>
> Cheers,
> Antonio
>
> P.S.: IntelliJ started blogging about their platform on June 2017, they
> even have a specific Twitter account:
>
> https://blog.jetbrains.com/platform/2017/06/introducing-jetb
> rains-platform-blog-and-twitter-for-plugin-developers/
>
>
> El 05/11/17 a las 20:22, Geertjan Wielenga escribió:
>
>> Here's the proposal, at the start of this thread:
>>
>> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
>> modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked
>> through
>> the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
>> JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX
>> is
>> not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
>>
>> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
>> i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
>> there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
>>
>> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
>> This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>>
>> Gj
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
>> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> We're talking about an alpha release here, not beta, and not final.
>>>
>>> The html.editor module is not part of the platform, which is part of the
>>> plan for the alpha release.
>>>
>>> There are no failing unit tests for the alpha release:
>>>
>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>>> incubator-netbeans-release/
>>>
>>> Gj
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
>>> mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey,
>>>>
>>>> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
>>>>>> for the
>>>>>> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>>>>>> incubator-netbeans-release/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
>>>>>> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
>>>>>> release
>>>>>> vote e-mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
>>>>> specifically, and
>>>>> narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
>>>>> beans-release/57/
>>>>>
>>>>> That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
>>>> came with important files removed. One such example was the
>>>> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
>>>> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>>>>
>>>> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
>>>> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
>>>> and fix them.
>>>>
>>>> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
>>>> would not release at this point.
>>>>
>>>> Greetings
>>>>
>>>> Matthias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Branding opportunity (was Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for
Apache NetBeans)
Posted by Antonio <an...@vieiro.net>.
Hi,
I was thinking that this is a great opportunity for branding and/or
renaming the platform, making emphasis that the platform is IDE
agnostic, and that it can be used to build any sort of desktop applications.
For instance, we could name the platform as "Apache NetBeans Platform"
(ANP), or "Apache NetBeans Application Platform" (ANAP), or "Apache
NetBeans Desktop Application Platform" (ANDAP), or "Apache NetBeans
Awesome Platform for building Flipping Modular Desktop Applications"
(ANAPFMDA), or whatever, instead of just "Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha".
The object being to make it clear that you can use the NetBeans Platform
to build any kind of applications, not just IDEs, and making it clear
that Apache NetBeans is much more than an IDE.
Choosing a name that is easy to find in search engines would be a plus.
Cheers,
Antonio
P.S.: IntelliJ started blogging about their platform on June 2017, they
even have a specific Twitter account:
https://blog.jetbrains.com/platform/2017/06/introducing-jetbrains-platform-blog-and-twitter-for-plugin-developers/
El 05/11/17 a las 20:22, Geertjan Wielenga escribió:
> Here's the proposal, at the start of this thread:
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
> modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
> the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
> not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
> i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>
> Gj
>
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> We're talking about an alpha release here, not beta, and not final.
>>
>> The html.editor module is not part of the platform, which is part of the
>> plan for the alpha release.
>>
>> There are no failing unit tests for the alpha release:
>>
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>> incubator-netbeans-release/
>>
>> Gj
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
>> mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
>>>>> for the
>>>>> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>>>>> incubator-netbeans-release/
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
>>>>> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
>>>>> release
>>>>> vote e-mail.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
>>>> specifically, and
>>>> narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
>>>>
>>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
>>>> beans-release/57/
>>>>
>>>> That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>>>
>>> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
>>> came with important files removed. One such example was the
>>> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
>>> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>>>
>>> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
>>> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
>>> and fix them.
>>>
>>> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
>>> would not release at this point.
>>>
>>> Greetings
>>>
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Matthias, as one of the most active and heavily involved and committed,
feel free to agree or disagree with the proposal, of course. Comments or
feedback on the 3-stage approach outlined below are very welcome and needed.
Gj
On Sunday, November 5, 2017, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Here's the proposal, at the start of this thread:
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
> modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
> the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
> not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
> i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>
> Gj
>
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> We're talking about an alpha release here, not beta, and not final.
>>
>> The html.editor module is not part of the platform, which is part of the
>> plan for the alpha release.
>>
>> There are no failing unit tests for the alpha release:
>>
>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incu
>> bator-netbeans-release/
>>
>> Gj
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
>> mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>>> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <lahoda@gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','lahoda@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
>>> > > for the
>>> > > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
>>> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>>> > > incubator-netbeans-release/
>>> > >
>>> > > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>>> > >
>>> > > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
>>> > > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
>>> > > release
>>> > > vote e-mail.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
>>> > specifically, and
>>> > narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
>>> >
>>> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
>>> > beans-release/57/
>>> >
>>> > That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>>>
>>> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
>>> came with important files removed. One such example was the
>>> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
>>> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>>>
>>> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
>>> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
>>> and fix them.
>>>
>>> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
>>> would not release at this point.
>>>
>>> Greetings
>>>
>>> Matthias
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Here's the proposal, at the start of this thread:
- Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
- Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
- Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
Gj
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> We're talking about an alpha release here, not beta, and not final.
>
> The html.editor module is not part of the platform, which is part of the
> plan for the alpha release.
>
> There are no failing unit tests for the alpha release:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> Gj
>
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
> mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
>> > > for the
>> > > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
>> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
>> > > incubator-netbeans-release/
>> > >
>> > > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>> > >
>> > > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
>> > > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
>> > > release
>> > > vote e-mail.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
>> > specifically, and
>> > narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
>> >
>> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
>> > beans-release/57/
>> >
>> > That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>>
>> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
>> came with important files removed. One such example was the
>> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
>> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>>
>> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
>> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
>> and fix them.
>>
>> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
>> would not release at this point.
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
We're talking about an alpha release here, not beta, and not final.
The html.editor module is not part of the platform, which is part of the
plan for the alpha release.
There are no failing unit tests for the alpha release:
https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
Gj
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
> > > for the
> > > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> > > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> > > incubator-netbeans-release/
> > >
> > > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
> > >
> > > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> > > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
> > > release
> > > vote e-mail.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
> > specifically, and
> > narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
> >
> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
> > beans-release/57/
> >
> > That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
>
> I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
> came with important files removed. One such example was the
> "html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
> of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
>
> So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
> through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
> and fix them.
>
> Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
> would not release at this point.
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hey,
Am Sonntag, den 05.11.2017, 19:57 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts,
> > for the
> > with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> > https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> > incubator-netbeans-release/
> >
> > Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
> >
> > The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> > releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the
> > release
> > vote e-mail.
> >
> >
>
> From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e.,
> specifically, and
> narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
>
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-net
> beans-release/57/
>
> That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
I disagree. Lars send an important message: The donation from oracle
came with important files removed. One such example was the
"html.editor" module, which lost it much of its functionality because
of removed DTDs. The same is true for XML schema files and such.
So from my POV we need to do the same as for the fixing of licenses: Go
through every module, run at least the unittests, check why they fail
and fix them.
Netbeans was always released after NetCat - that should catch it, but I
would not release at this point.
Greetings
Matthias
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts, for the
> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>
> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the release
> vote e-mail.
>
>
From #57 onwards, the build of NetBeans 9.0 Alpha (i.e., specifically, and
narrowly, the NetBeans Platform) is blue:
https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/57/
That means we can send the release vote e-mail.
Gj
> The checks performed are:
> -rat
> -ant verify-libs-and-licenses (checks consistency between -licence.txt
> files, binaries and nbbuild/licenses; IMO this is one of the
> pre-requisities to have a trustworthy DEPENDENCIES file)
>
> The job builds both the source (to-be-release) zip and a convenience
> binary.
>
> Please note that I've just submitted two PR that fix (or "fix") some of the
> problems:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/216
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/215
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> > IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a
> range
> > of different people:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
> >
> > To dos:
> >
> > 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> > we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> > the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look
> at
> > the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to
> get
> > it done:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> > List+of+Modules+to+Review
> >
> > 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> > i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> > we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> > requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
> >
> > 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> > the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp
> and
> > SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re
> JavaHelp,
> > while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to
> get
> > rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is
> and
> > fixing where needed.
> >
> > 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the
> core
> > modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked
> through
> > the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> > JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX
> is
> > not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans
> Git,
> > i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> > there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> > This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
> >
> > 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> > NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
> >
> > 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> > Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> > we're currently working on.
> >
> > Comments and feedback welcome,
> >
> > Geertjan
> >
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
This is really great!
Gj
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts, for the
> with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
> https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/
> incubator-netbeans-release/
>
> Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
>
> The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
> releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the release
> vote e-mail.
>
> The checks performed are:
> -rat
> -ant verify-libs-and-licenses (checks consistency between -licence.txt
> files, binaries and nbbuild/licenses; IMO this is one of the
> pre-requisities to have a trustworthy DEPENDENCIES file)
>
> The job builds both the source (to-be-release) zip and a convenience
> binary.
>
> Please note that I've just submitted two PR that fix (or "fix") some of the
> problems:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/216
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/215
>
> Feedback is welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Jan
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> > IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a
> range
> > of different people:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
> >
> > To dos:
> >
> > 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> > we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> > the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look
> at
> > the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to
> get
> > it done:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> > List+of+Modules+to+Review
> >
> > 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> > i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> > we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> > requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
> >
> > 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> > the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp
> and
> > SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re
> JavaHelp,
> > while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to
> get
> > rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is
> and
> > fixing where needed.
> >
> > 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the
> core
> > modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked
> through
> > the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> > JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX
> is
> > not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans
> Git,
> > i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> > there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
> >
> > - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> > This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
> >
> > 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> > NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
> >
> > 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> > Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> > we're currently working on.
> >
> > Comments and feedback welcome,
> >
> > Geertjan
> >
>
Re: Current Status & Proposed Plan for Apache NetBeans
Posted by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com>.
FWIW, I've started with a Jenkins job to build release artefacts, for the
with "9.0 alpha" platform-only release here:
https://builds.apache.org/view/Incubator%20Projects/job/incubator-netbeans-release/
Please note this is still a work-in-progress.
The idea is that the build should do very minimal checks to verify
releaseability. When the build passes/is blue, we could send the release
vote e-mail.
The checks performed are:
-rat
-ant verify-libs-and-licenses (checks consistency between -licence.txt
files, binaries and nbbuild/licenses; IMO this is one of the
pre-requisities to have a trustworthy DEPENDENCIES file)
The job builds both the source (to-be-release) zip and a convenience binary.
Please note that I've just submitted two PR that fix (or "fix") some of the
problems:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/216
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/215
Feedback is welcome.
Thanks,
Jan
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We're making great progress, we have been working together well, and have
> IP clearance related commits from a significant group constituting a range
> of different people:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/graphs/contributors
>
> To dos:
>
> 1. There's around 300 (out of 45,000) files left to process -- the sooner
> we can get that down to 0, either via re-licensing or via Rat exclusions,
> the better. That should be our central focus for this week. Take a look at
> the Rat report, see who is listed to work on it, and work with them to get
> it done:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> List+of+Modules+to+Review
>
> 2. We've also been working on downloading binaries from Maven Central,
> i.e., that's the logical and officially accepted place for binaries and
> we're trying to leverage that as much as possible -- though that's not a
> requirement for releasing NetBeans from Apache.
>
> 3. Binaries that are GPL-ed need to be handled in some way -- in terms of
> the core of NetBeans, i.e., the NetBeans Platform, that means JavaHelp and
> SwingLayout. Various solutions have been offered and discussed re JavaHelp,
> while SwingLayout may simply need to be removed, as a first attempt to get
> rid of it, and then we should see what the consequence of doing that is and
> fixing where needed.
>
> 4. Plan a first Apache release. Here's a proposal:
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Alpha -- NetBeans Platform only (i.e., only the core
> modules, possibly without JavaHelp). In this way, we'll have worked through
> the process for a coherent part of Apache NetBeans and will only have
> JavaHelp and SwingLayout to deal with in terms of GPL. (I believe SwingX is
> not applicable to the platform, but the IDE.)
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 Beta -- Everything currently in Apache NetBeans Git,
> i.e., the above and then also including all the other clusters currently
> there, i.e., Java SE tooling.
>
> - Apache NetBeans 9.0 -- All of the above, including NetCAT involvement.
> This will be the officially tested version of Apache NetBeans.
>
> 5. I propose we aim to begin with the official release process of Apache
> NetBeans 9.0 Alpha next week.
>
> 6. All the other parts of NetBeans (Java EE etc) are still in process at
> Oracle, which is good, since it means we're able to focus on the subset
> we're currently working on.
>
> Comments and feedback welcome,
>
> Geertjan
>