Phycologically people feel they have a more modern system if it updates more frequently. There should be no reason why minor items can't be released quickly in a more agile way. I suspect though we need to move out of incubator status for that because there are a lot of rounds of approval before code gets released.
You could have large core releases once or twice a year and many minor updates imbetween. This is a personal thing but I would like to get the updates without downloading a new version of the ide every time. Letting the ide auto update would be nice. I guess that could only happen when the module update issue is resolved On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 15:24 Geertjan Wielenga, <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote: > Also, Apache NetBeans is more than Java-focused, and the question is also > whether such prominence for Java should be given to the extent that the JDK > releases should be followed at all, i.e., whether this should be an aim of > the project. It's certainly open to discussion but definitely not a given. > > Gj > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 4:22 PM, Geertjan Wielenga < > geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Just as a quick FYI: Both JDK 9 and JDK 10 are supported in Apache > > NetBeans 9, i.e., no, we've not skipped JDK 10. > > > > Gj > > > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Chuck Davis <cjgun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> To me it makes sense to have NB reflect the level of Java implemented. > >> For > >> example, features of JDK 11 can be added incrementally to NB 9.1, 9.2, > >> etc. > >> (schedule is irrelevant to me -- every 3 months is fine) but when the > >> full > >> function of JDK 11 is included then NB 11 should be released. I assume > >> we're going to skip JDK 10 at this point. Releases like 2018.3 tell me > >> nothing about what the product includes. But if Java moves to that > naming > >> scheme then NB should move to that scheme to indicate what is > implemented. > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 1:46 AM, Geertjan Wielenga < > >> geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com.invalid> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > We've discussed this informally, i.e., the topic of the release > >> > cycle/cadence, a few times over the past months. > >> > > >> > Let's nail it down as far as possible so that we can give clarity to > our > >> > users about our intentions and also to enable us to organize features > >> > coming in through donations and otherwise into releases. > >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/ > >> > Apache+NetBeans+Release+Cycle > >> > > >> > Right now, we have a clear suggestion around in which month of the > year > >> we > >> > will release. I.e., the Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 release was > our > >> > August release (and we even managed to release it a few days early, in > >> > July, hurray!). So, this year, we will have another release in > November, > >> > that's our next big target, if we agree with the above proposal. > >> > > >> > However, a separate discussion is about release numbers. Our current > >> > release is 9.0. How do we decide to number the other releases? A > simple > >> > proposal might be to have our major release in August of each year and > >> then > >> > all then make all the other releases minor. However, that's just a > >> thought, > >> > another one could be that we should simply consider how large the > >> features > >> > are that we have added and base major/minor on that. Or we could try > to > >> > follow the JDK release numbering more or less. > >> > > >> > Anyway, thoughts welcome, > >> > > >> > Gj > >> > > >> > > > > >
