If we have AdoptOpenJDK officially providing a bundle together with NetBeans, then I think we should consider not providing an installer at all — and just make the convenience binary available as a ZIP and point to AdoptOpenJDK and OpenBeans and any other bundlers/distributors.
Gj On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 17:53, Geertjan Wielenga <geert...@apache.org> wrote: > > Excellent news, Kirk. > > How do we get this done? > > Gj > > On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 17:49, Kirk Pepperdine <k...@kodewerk.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Again, I believe that you could distribute from Adopt with a JDK bundled. >> So maybe this is a case where using a 3rd party makes sense. >> >> Kind regards, >> Kirk >> >> >> > On Nov 28, 2019, at 8:45 AM, Kenneth Fogel <kfo...@dawsoncollege.qc.ca> >> wrote: >> > >> > I apologize if I misunderstood but the conversation appeared to me, >> likely incorrectly, to go beyond just bundling a Java JDK. The installers >> that are already there, are they downloading a JDK if one is not present? >> Requiring a separate install of Java is the status quo. If we could make >> that part of the NetBeans installer then we should an we should pursue an >> exemption to Apache policies if required. >> > >> > Ken >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Geertjan Wielenga <geert...@apache.org> >> > Sent: November 28, 2019 11:30 AM >> > To: dev@netbeans.apache.org >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping Installers from the Release Process >> leave that work to Third Party Distributors >> > >> > You’re aware that we’re already distributing an installer, right? And >> that that is not what we’re talking about? >> > >> > We’re talking about the fact that we can’t bundle the JDK with that >> installer and then distribute that installer from Apache. >> > >> > A simple link on our download page to OpenBeans and AdoptOpenJDK and >> any other distributor is all we need, for the installers of NetBeans that >> bundle the JDK. >> > >> > Gj >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 17:20, Kenneth Fogel <kfo...@dawsoncollege.qc.ca >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> >> This is a bad idea. I personally feel that an installer is mandatory. >> >> Eclipse and IntelliJ have installers for all platforms. Leaving it to >> >> third parties will mean that we have no oversight on the quality and >> >> ease of use of the installer. Only distributing a zip file implies >> >> that skills beyond learning to code with NetBeans will be required. We >> >> can pretty much write off the education sector if there is no >> >> installer. Sorry to be harsh but this is a line I believe we must not >> cross. >> >> >> >> It is unfortunates, as someone has pointed out, that Apache is not end >> >> user friendly but that is no excuse. NetBeans is an end user program >> >> and must be as easy to install as any other IDE and have an official >> installer. >> >> >> >> Ken >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Laszlo Kishalmi <laszlo.kisha...@gmail.com> >> >> Sent: November 27, 2019 2:41 PM >> >> To: Apache NetBeans <dev@netbeans.apache.org> >> >> Subject: [DISCUSS] Dropping Installers from the Release Process leave >> >> that work to Third Party Distributors >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> It is a great burden to us to provide the best out-of-the-box install >> >> experience with NetBeans. That would mean, providing an installer with >> >> JDK, nb-javac probably javafx. >> >> >> >> See the threads: >> >> >> >> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a3e6051130e18aae3f7a81c562a63ac96 >> >> d3a3a07d4bcbee074392d59@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E >> >> >> >> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/489f17e30d9125ee48e2d78dc36572db6 >> >> a3f5d6474f492458e0db151@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E >> >> >> >> On 11/26/19 9:29 PM, Laszlo Kishalmi wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Dear all, >> >>> >> >>> I try to summary the lengthy threads about bundling OpenJDK GPL+CPE >> >>> with Apache NetBeans. >> >>> >> >>> There are mainly two readings of GPL+CPE: >> >>> >> >>> 1. OpenJDK (GPL+CPE) + NetBeans (Apache) = Executable which can be >> >>> distributed under Apache license, due to CPE 2. CPE only allows >> >>> other product built on Java to be distributed >> >>> under their own license. >> >>> >> >>> As I'm not a lawyer, I cannot answer which interpretation is correct >> >>> (maybe none of them). ASF has every right to regard the second >> >>> interpretation, thus GPL+CPE ended up in the Category-X licenses. >> >>> >> >>> The following viable possibilities were brought up: >> >>> >> >>> 1. We may apply for an exception to the board 2. Use some download >> >>> logic in the installer. >> >>> 3. Leave the binary packaging and distribution to third parties. >> >>> >> >>> Regarding that there are interest from third parties to built on >> >>> Apache NetBeans, I'm going to recommend the PMC to select a few >> >>> distributor for creating installer packages and we limit/drop our >> >>> installer bundle creation in the future. >> >>> >> >>> Thank you, >> >>> >> >>> Laszlo Kishalmi >> >>> >> >> >> >> I do not think that after this discussion we would get the exception >> >> from the board Geertjan might try to bring it up there as well. >> >> >> >> As of me option 2 is questionable. >> >> >> >> Option 3. is a bit hard to say, but if we can't produce proper >> >> installation packages, it would probably better to not create those >> >> packages at all, leave that for others. >> >> >> >> How I imagine that: >> >> >> >> 1. From 11.3 we remove the convenience binaries and installers from >> >> our download page >> >> 2. We would still create, sign and host our nbm-s. >> >> 3. On our download page we have the source package and a section for >> >> third party distributors. >> >> >> >> Well of course this thread is just to start a discussion about this >> >> matter. I know it would hurt the brand, but probably it is better than >> >> produce some sub-optimal installers while other parties can come with >> >> all the bells and whistles. >> >> >> >> Thank you, >> >> >> >> Laszlo Kishalmi >> >> >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org >> > >> > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org >> >> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists >> >> >> >>
