Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

On Sep 14, 2016, at 04:02, Bertrand Delacretaz  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 4:22 PM, David Nalley  wrote:
 ...SIR03 Migration of plugin publication system, plugins.netbeans.org, to 
 Apache infrastructure
>> 
>> This looks to be an interesting. Are the plugins gated by license? Any
>> vetting going on? Is there a history of DMCA requests being served by
>> things uploaded to plugins.nb.o? How much bandwidth does this site
>> consume? Are their folks who can maintain this site from bare metal up
>> in the project?...
> 
> The plugins.netbeans.org site says "plugins provided by community
> members and third-party companies" so I doubt Oracle has the rights to
> donate all that code to us. Sorry that we missed that during the
> proposal preparation phase.
> 

This is like uploading to Maven central or r.m.a.o and distributing binaries 
which are uploaded from community members, such as myself. How does 
repo.maven.apache.org  work? All I really know 
it is hosted by way of a fastly.net  account, but I don’t 
know if that is infra ASF provides or a 3rd party thing. That is perhaps a 
rough equivalent depending on the way binaries get there though. For example, 
these are not donated to Apache:
http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/com/oracle/ojdbc14/10.2.0.2.0/ 

http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/com/microsoft/azure/ 


But, the main point is these are binaries which someone/system most likely 
uploaded through an automated way or browser or something else manually, and 
are distributed to Maven builds which request them. The sources and javadocs 
JAR files may end up there too in various forms of licenses.

> If that's correct I would suggest keeping the plugins.netbeans.org
> migration out of the incubation proposal, and letting Apache NetBeans
> handle that later. That might just be suggesting to move that code to
> GitHub and creating an alternate plugin installation mechanism that
> grabs whatever it needs there.
> 
> It looks like those plugins are clearly "code associated with an
> Apache project" once NetBeans migrates to the ASF, but code that
> probably shouldn't belong to the ASF.
> 
> Owners of specific plugins will still be able to donate them as well,
> separately, once Apache NetBeans is established, via our IP clearance
> mechanism, http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/
> 

Just to clarify, these are dynamic extensions created for the IDE. This is the 
same as plugins for Maven. netbeans.org  doesn’t host our 
code, but only our binaries in “plugin” form, and then links to our projects.

I am but a community member, so what ever is decided works obviously, but I 
wanted to clarify and point to similarities.

Thanks,

Wade

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

> On Sep 14, 2016, at 09:28, Daniel Gruno  wrote:
> 
> On 09/14/2016 03:17 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote:
>> NetBeans.org  has forums that mirror the mailing lists 
>> (well, not always,
>> sometimes we've had syncing problems). My feeling is that since Apache
>> doesn't support forums, we could simply drop them. No need to convert the
>> forums to mailing lists, instead our mailing lists will need to be moved if
>> possible to Apache's mailing lists, while the forums can simply be dropped.
>> That would be my proposal for this, though some NetBeans community members
>> may differ and indeed it will be good to explicitly list this so that we
>> can track it when moving forward into incubation.
> 
> While not a forum in the traditional sense, lists.apache.org 
>  does offer
> interacting with lists without having to use a separate mail client. You
> just log in via oauth and then read/write stuff :)
> 

Wow…all these years using the Apache lists in some way or another I never knew 
about that. That is pretty cool, and I do think it could replace forums. 
Certainly users have to get used to anything new. I think the Apache OAuth 
button, and the Mozilla Persona buttons, should perhaps be slightly different. 
The button itself could read “Apache Commiters Login” with a sub-link bottom 
right justified “using Apache OAuth” and “Apache Users Login” and a sub-link 
bottom right justified “using Mozilla Persona”; just to make it more intuitive, 
but certainly works, and is awesome! I had never used Persona, but it was easy 
to setup and get going.

Wade

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

> 
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 09:38, Wade Chandler  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Sep 14, 2016, at 09:28, Daniel Gruno > <mailto:humbed...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> On 09/14/2016 03:17 PM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote:
>>> NetBeans.org <http://netbeans.org/> has forums that mirror the mailing 
>>> lists (well, not always,
>>> sometimes we've had syncing problems). My feeling is that since Apache
>>> doesn't support forums, we could simply drop them. No need to convert the
>>> forums to mailing lists, instead our mailing lists will need to be moved if
>>> possible to Apache's mailing lists, while the forums can simply be dropped.
>>> That would be my proposal for this, though some NetBeans community members
>>> may differ and indeed it will be good to explicitly list this so that we
>>> can track it when moving forward into incubation.
>> 
>> While not a forum in the traditional sense, lists.apache.org 
>> <http://lists.apache.org/> does offer
>> interacting with lists without having to use a separate mail client. You
>> just log in via oauth and then read/write stuff :)
>> 
> 
> Wow…all these years using the Apache lists in some way or another I never 
> knew about that. That is pretty cool, and I do think it could replace forums. 
> Certainly users have to get used to anything new. I think the Apache OAuth 
> button, and the Mozilla Persona buttons, should perhaps be slightly 
> different. The button itself could read “Apache Commiters Login” with a 
> sub-link bottom right justified “using Apache OAuth” and “Apache Users Login” 
> and a sub-link bottom right justified “using Mozilla Persona”; just to make 
> it more intuitive, but certainly works, and is awesome! I had never used 
> Persona, but it was easy to setup and get going.
> 

Hmm, so it seems if I’m subscribed to a list the message goes through without a 
hiccup, but if not, then it takes a good bit if it will be delivered at all. 
Does anyone know if you are not subscribed to a list if you can start 
conversations in other lists from lists.apache.org <http://lists.apache.org/>?

Thanks,

Wade

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

Do you mean from the stand point of it being a Java based application, or that 
some how NetBeans and the Java TCK are related? I don’t think either is an 
impact on NetBeans IMHO; not any more than it is for the Eclipse IDE or 
IntelliJ. Do you mean because it is being contributed by Oracle perhaps? If so, 
does the donor have as much impact on contributions as that once adopted by 
Apache? I may be misunderstanding what you are asking. I am not an employee of 
Oracle; just an NB contributor.

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com



> On Sep 14, 2016, at 13:41, Shane Curcuru  wrote:
> 
> Given the historical difficulty in securing usable Java-related TCK
> licenses from Oracle, will that be an issue in attracting long-term
> contributors to the project in the future?
> 
> A number of existing Apache projects have noted that lack of proper and
> formal access to TCKs is an issue for some of their users.  Given the
> wide range of plugins and integrations, I wonder if this would also be
> an issue for a future Apache NetBeans project.
> 
> Just curious: I'm not a major NetBeans user so perhaps this isn't that
> relevant to the future of the potential podling.
> 
> - Shane
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

I don't personally have any products using the name necessarily. I do have
a plugin that uses the word NetBeans as part of its name, but it is only
used in NetBeans, and freely available in the portal, but is the only one,
and could be renamed if plugins also have this restriction; may impact
others worse.

We do have a serious user group called "The NetBeans Dream Team", which
works as commiters, user support, evangelists, etc, to promote the project,
and is not an Oracle thing. What about the use in that sense of user
community names? Too, there are other groups who do things with logos. We
print off our own personal T-shirts and things too; not for profit but use.
Are any of these type actions restricted as well or anything we should be
concerned about?

Also, the branding is "NetBeans" versus "Netbeans" just to be sure.

Thanks, and I will review the info,

Wade

On Sep 14, 2016 3:17 PM, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:

> Good point:
>
> The ASF (actually the single PMCs of the ASF) do handle trademark rules
> pretty strictly:
>
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
>
>
> The main reason is that we
>
> a.) need to defend the marks, otherwise they vanish and could be (ab-)used
> by anyone
> b.) as a non-for-profit organisation we must act for the public good, and
> must not allow a single company to have any advantage over others. If we
> don't act accordingly we might loose our 501(c) status.
>
> The same is btw true for other non-for-profit OSS foundations, even if
> they don't realise it (and then get beaten up by IRS).
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wednesday, 14 September 2016, 20:40, Roman Shaposhnik <
> ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Wade Chandler
> >  wrote:
> >>  Do you mean from the stand point of it being a Java based application,
> or
> > that some how
> >>  NetBeans and the Java TCK are related? I don’t think either is an
> impact on
> > NetBeans IMHO;
> >>  not any more than it is for the Eclipse IDE or IntelliJ. Do you mean
> > because it is being contributed
> >>  by Oracle perhaps? If so, does the donor have as much impact on
> > contributions as that once
> >>  adopted by Apache? I may be misunderstanding what you are asking. I am
> not
> > an employee
> >>  of Oracle; just an NB contributor.
> >
> > I think the question is more along the lines of what else would be
> > required to produce a "canonical"
> > release of Apache Netbeans. If everything that is required is being
> > donated -- I think we're good.
> > IOW, the project must be self-contained and not depend on anything
> > still left behind the firewall
> > to do on-going development and most important releases. E.g. if I send
> > you a patch -- you can't
> > reject it on the grounds that some test behind Oracle's frewall I've
> > never seen failed. Stuff like
> > that.
> >
> > On a related note, I haven't seen it explicitly  mentioned in the
> > proposal, but I hope you guys do
> > realize that once this project is accepted the Netbeans brand belongs
> > to Apache. IOW, if Oracle
> > or anybody else ever want to have an independent product based on
> > Apache Netbeans they will
> > have to call it something else.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

Technically NetBeans is both an RCP, first technically, and an IDE, so it
is a library, and an application, but no, there is no separate TCK. All the
tests are in the build infrastructure you get when you clone the
repository. There are some infrastructure things which the community uses
to validate release, through community programs/processes such as NetCat,
but those are not running tests. They are more for community sign off and
manual regression testing; formalized crowd sourced testing.

Wade

On Sep 14, 2016 7:41 PM, "Greg Stein"  wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Shane Curcuru 
> wrote:
> >...
>
> > >> I think the question is more along the lines of what else would be
> > >> required to produce a "canonical"
> > >> release of Apache Netbeans. If everything that is required is being
> > >> donated -- I think we're good.
> >
> > Indeed - and remember, I'm not a regular NetBeans user.  But when I
> > google "NetBeans", I see lots of links of bundled JDK downloads and
> > various plugins that do all sorts of cool Java stuff.  My question is:
> > does producing a fully working core NetBeans require running any TCKs?
> >
>
> It's just an application. Not a library. No TCKs involved.
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

On Sep 15, 2016, at 08:15, Bertrand Delacretaz  wrote:
> 
> Hi Incubator PMC,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>  wrote:
>> ... https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansProposal ...
> 
> At this point I ask anyone with concerns or questions that haven't
> been addressed so far and would prevent us from voting on this
> proposal to chime in.
> 


NetBeans has installers, and those installers inevitably bake in some things. 
ATM they provide both Tomcat and Glassfish. I assume that could be changed to 
TomEE or what ever, but would like to know what limits to bundling of various 
binaries there are during build time to build artifacts. Too, is it possible to 
provide an installer which bundles as part of its runtime, to run on the host 
operation system, a JRE, or is this problematic? What about an installation 
which installs a JDK for the user (combo installers)? Is there any precedence 
for this with other Apache projects? I’m not sure this matters for incubation, 
but would like to know what we’ll be able to do going forward as a community 
member who likes students and new programmer users to be able to get up and 
running quickly without having to have as many pre-requisites; this is handy 
for trainers as well.

Thanks,

Wade 


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:04, Alex Harui  <mailto:aha...@adobe.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de.invalid>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
>> properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP
>> provenance... Etc, etc.
> 
> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
> couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
> else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
> matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not who.
> 

Sorry…sent first from wrong email alias...

NB has a contributor agreement too, and so to contribute we all had to sign one 
assigning IP to Oracle (same for Sun when they were around).

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/patches.html 
<https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/patches.html>

“If this is your first code submission to netbeans.org <http://netbeans.org/>, 
you must fill in a Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf> page for more info.”

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/hg.html 
<https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/hg.html>

“You must have filled in a Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf> page for more info. No 
code can be committed until a CA is completed.”

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf 
<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf>

Thanks,

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com <mailto:cons...@wadechandler.com>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:04, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:
> 
> 
>> We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
>> properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP
>> provenance... Etc, etc.
> 
> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
> couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
> else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
> matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not who.
> 

NB has a contributor agreement too, and so to contribute we all had to sign one 
assigning IP to Oracle (same for Sun when they were around).

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/patches.html 
<https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/patches.html>

“If this is your first code submission to netbeans.org, you must fill in a 
Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf> page for more info.”

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/hg.html 
<https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/hg.html>

“You must have filled in a Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf> page for more info. No 
code can be committed until a CA is completed.”

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf 
<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf>

Thanks,

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

On Sep 21, 2016 4:15 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" 
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Mark Struberg
>  wrote:
> > ...Please note that during the incubation people need to either show
that they
> > are eager to engage with the community...
>
> Indeed, but for a well established project like NetBeans I suppose the
> initial committers will recognize some people as soon as they show up,
> as contributors to NetBeans before Apache, and suggest electing them
> quicker than if they were unknown. With such a large project it's
> probably impossible to create a fully fair initial list of committers,
> and fixing that shortly after entering incubation is fine.
>
>

I can say as a long time contributor who is not on the initial list, I
understand, think it is fine, and agree that being added once we get into
the actual incubation phase makes sense. It seems moot until then as you
can see I am able to contribute as much as I can at this stage anyways. I
think that is the direction people need if they do not already know or
understand it as getting into building a thorough list before hand will
certainly take time away from higher priority items at this stage.

Thanks

Wade

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

nk Netbeans has the balance somewhat right - but I would hope
> there would be more engagement on their existing lists to more openly
> invite anyone who wants to join; or at least make it clear that the
> whole of the community (read: mailing list) gets to influence project
> decisions.
> 

Yes, everyone on the lists “influences” the project now, but not everyone on 
the mailing list gets “committer” rights or the same influence; even in Apache 
projects that I have seen. We have a merit based process for that now. In the 
ASF us non-Oracle employee committers should then gain a higher level of 
influence as it becomes community driven versus single entity driven; we 
certainly have to step up though! … like Spiderman’s Uncle Ben said … great 
power; great responsibility.

My assumption or expectation perhaps is roughly (and I imagine it will be 
close) 1) if you were a committer to NB, per its already existing rules, then 
you are in 2) if you were already submitting patches to “show you know what you 
are doing” per the current rules, then you are in 3) if you were not an active 
contributor, then you have to step up and show merit. This essentially models 
the current NB process, and per my involvement with different Apache projects 
over the years, is roughly like a lot of them.

Thanks,

Wade



===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

Phone top posting:

I agree plugins are a huge part of NetBeans success; you need them for
Gradle support as an example. Sure, you can install them outside the
portal, but it is a pain for most. What ever you all are able to do is
greatly appreciated; whether now or soon, and whether that is an incubator
stipulation or not.

But, along with this discussion plus some other questions I saw, and just
to be clear if doing this sooner rather than later, there is a difference
in the sources and the binaries; I realise I may be reiterating on a prior
statement, but I think it is key.

Does Maven only host Apache owned plugins? What is the difference? The IDE
and platform have to be able to compete as a project and community. Does
Eclipse or JetBrains own all of the ones in their portals? What about
Gradle?

I ask these obvious rhetorical questions to get to this point: Would it be
feasible for NetBeans to succeed among competing projects with such a
stipulation that all hosted or distributed plugins be contributed to Apache
or licensed the same? Without an ecosystem and infrastructure that doesn't
force everyone into the same model, which is why the Apache license has
been so successful on a different level IMO, and Maven and Gradle on a
similar level, then I don't see such a project succeeding considering its
user base and use cases.

I agree porting plugins portal to use Maven central won't happen overnight,
and the community won't do well without the portal; it would be a huge set
back. Too, even if the artifacts are in central, the portal UI will still
be necessary as the artifact UI just doesn't support the same use cases; in
case there is any question.

Thanks,

Wade

On Sep 23, 2016 10:59 PM, "Greg Stein"  wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacre...@apache.org
> > wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> >  wrote:
> > >...there hasn't even been a vote on the proposal at this stage. :-)
> >
> > Correct ;-)
> >
> > FWIW I've seen an internal draft of Daniel Gruno's infrastructure cost
> > analysis so that's progressing nicely, we should have public results
> > soon and can then move forward.
> >
>
> One thing that is coming out of this discussion, and the costing is
> plugins.nb.o. That seems to be a critical part of the NetBeans ecosystem
> and cannot just be "left behind for a few months, and we'll hope to figure
> it out before Oracle shuts it down".
>
> I think it would be a tremendous hardship to the community to enter
> incubation, not solve plugins.nb.o, and get their podling retired. Where
> would NB go then? Would not be fun. (and by "solve", I mean: some basic
> technical approach here at the ASF, and a +1 that the ASF can absorb the
> related cost).
>
> As an IPMC member, I'd be hard-pressed to accept NB without some of idea of
> how the community will handle plugins. As Infra, I can help Daniel Gruno
> with the costing and getting that +1 from on high.
>
> (Note: I am sure that NB could be changed over time to use (say) Maven
> Central, as mentioned else-thread, but that change is a multi-year rollout;
> plugins.nb.o would likely need to exist even past that)
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>

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

[Wade Chandler]

First, I think we need to see the data you are referring to. Anecdotally
the NB community seems to be growing. We are certainly competing with more
projects such as VS Code and others in recent years. However, given reviews
over the past many years of Java IDEs, NB has consistently been in the top
3. IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate is not an open source project by the way, so I
suggest any comparisons to it, especially in the context of an organization
such as Apache, is not relevant. Money being one thing, and everything else
another, including OSS versus sort of OSS, I think it a fair question, but
I hope not a subjective and biased one.

Has moving to Apache ever reversed trends which you are referring? For
instance, does Apache champion it's own model over others? Why should a
project move to the Apache way? Us in the NB community have pushed Oracle
to move to a more open and community focused model for years. This sounded
like it was about to happen, and many were excited to hear Apache, but I
don't know what goal post this is, and if realistic, and if this email is
to be viewed negatively or not.

It doesn't seem oriented towards analyzing statements of cost to be applied
in support of other projects, or a way forward based on cost reduction or
code sharing given the initial estimate, but instead focuses on a seemingly
nebulous decline of NetBeans which is the first news I have seen of this.

Are there ways to cut the cost estimates? GoDaddy (surely others) has some
nice plans with unlimited storage and bandwidth, and some rewrites of some
systems with PHP, could make some things more viable. What about cost share
across projects with similar needs? Do no other Apache projects have
plugins or distribution needs? Other than build servers, what can't be
consolidated? What about monetary donations to projects or specific Apache
line items? Has there been any such talk?

How many other OSS Java IDEs are their? Seem only 2 at the Eclipse and
NetBeans level. Having them both exist makes the entire ecosystem healthier
in my opinion. It would be a shame to not have one of the real open source
Java IDEs exist as an Apache project IMO.

Thanks

Wade

On Sep 24, 2016 7:16 PM, "Ross Gardler"  wrote:

> The ASF need to justify spending an extra $10k per year in this one
> project at the expense of that $10k going to other projects.
>
> Don't make the request until the IPMC can present an argument that a move
> of NetBeans to the ASF will reverse the decline in interest that NetBeans
> is seeing.
>
> It may sound trivial, but we can support three "traditional" ASF projects
> for NetBeans budget. As a charity we need to think carefully about how we
> spend our money. A solid argument that this would reverse the downward
> trend for NetBeans will go a long way to reassuring me (as one member, but
> also as the person ultimately responsible for paying such a budget request
> to the board).
>
> Ross
>
> ---
> Twitter: @rgardler
>
> 
> From: Ted Dunning 
> Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 4:04:34 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings (was: [DISCUSS] Apache
> NetBeans Incubator Proposal)
>
> Should this request come from IPMC? Seems like it should be at least a coop
> request between infra (who get the budget and the operational onus) and
> incubator (who cause the problem).
>
> Certainly the budget shouldn't come to the IPMC if approved.
>
> I will work with the board to determine the best form.
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Chris Mattmann 
> wrote:
>
> > Daniel this is great work. Thank you for outlining this. Wow!
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > On 9/24/16, 3:17 AM, "Daniel Gruno"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I've been going over the requirements for NetBeans infrastructure,
> it's
> > ballpark costs, bandwidth, machines needed and so forth, and the
> cliff
> > notes are as follows:
> >
> > - 40-50TB/month in traffic required (mostly downloads+plugins)
> > - 8-13 machines/VMS are required
> > - Ballpark hardware costs are between $3k and $10k per year,
> depending
> >   on how much we can move to existing infrastructure and how close we
> >   come to the original setup. The most likely figure we are working
> > with
> >   is $4.9k, but we should be prepared for a larger cost, just in
> case.
> > - The maintenance will be split between infra (downloads, web site,
> CI,
> >   new build machines) and the project (services, plugins,
> statistics),
> >   which will undoubtedly incur additional costs in terms of infra
> time
> >   spent on this, possibly to the tune of $10-20k in the initial
> phase.
> >
> > Certain services like the plugins hosting will rely on Legal giving
> the
> > go-ahead for it, otherwise we'll have to find other people willing to
> > host this.
> >
> > Other items like downloads may be offset by CDN providers offering
> > their
> > assistance,

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

On Sep 24, 2016 9:51 AM, "Emilian Bold"  wrote:
> > Which brings us to another question:
> > If the commits just referenced a bugzilla ticket, do we also like to
> > migrate the bugzilla content over?
> > Or at least keep it browsable somewhere?
> >
>
> I would want to keep as much of the context/history as possible. Bugzilla
> issues have a lot of important discussions.

Yes, the reality is all the current and ongoing work is in BZ. Some have
patches attached to them at any point in time. Then anything we have found
in the IDE or platform and expected either Oracle or a community member to
fix at some point are there. So, I would say quite important information
there.

Thanks

Wade

Re: Radical proposal: no initial list of committers

[Wade Chandler]

On Sep 27, 2016 10:44 AM, "Gregory Chase"  wrote:
>
> Having been through this with Apache Geode, I like the idea of paying
> homage to emeritus committers in the proposal and history of the
> technology.  If you start with a rule of providing committer privileges to
> those who have directly committed to the project in the last two or three
> years, and a liberal policy of granting new committer privileges as
needed,
> I think you should be ok.  Does an emeritus committer need commit
> privileges today? Only if they start committing again.
>
> And for those that want prestige - the prestige rests in being an active
> evangelist of the project. One does not ever need to be a committer to
> achieve prestige.
>

I agree with Gregory's POV on this. It is open and easy to do. His email
could be the reference for how it should work IMO.

I will add my POV

The list is a tribute and a starting point for where the project "is" when
it comes to Apache. If it is already OSS, then why new merit? It came with
merit and that should continue; it isn't a vacuum. Otherwise it is
exclusive of merit. If not previously OSS, then the donators best know who
did what or who will initially carry on unless the intent is to no longer
be heavily involved in the project.

Obviously the project now has to operate for the ASF community, but a
project needs those who know it one way or another.

If new people want in, let them show a little effort for code, and in, as
long as they can write good bug free code with tests.

If they want status, without coding, then evangelism and users both are
always needed.

Stating the obvious, but we need coders, users, and evangelism to have a
successful project and community, and that seems common in OSS and
commercial alike. For OSS, we should be as open and inclusive as possible;
it's voluntary after all. The bar for merit should match.

Obviously if someone is doing anything malicious, ever, they are gone.

I think the issue this thread is trying to address is a lack of protocol. A
protocol can be simple and open as long as it states the rules and intent,
and is the thing which everyone defers. Perhaps that needs clarified in the
incubator process documents or better followed if there. There should not
be varying opinions when it comes time to onboard a new project.

If ever in need of change and review, then OK, processes can handle that.

Lacking a protocol, or if folks don't want one, then it should be
completely up to the mentors and sponsor to spell out what to do for their
podling. Otherwise you have various opportunity for contention with no
framework or fact, but subjective opinions of everyone involved even if
informed by experience. But, even that is managed to a degree by some
protocol in the mentor process.

Thanks

Wade

Re: [VOTE] Accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator

[Wade Chandler]

ation of other NetBeans infrastructure to
> be
>migrated to Apache infastructures
>
> SIR03 was initially mentioned as the migration of plugins.netbeans.org to
> Apache
> infrastructure but after discussing the proposal we have decided to remove
> that
> goal for now.
> The plugins service will eventually have to migrate, but that can happen
> separately from the project incubation process.
>
> == Initial Committers ==
>
> Below is the initial list of individual contributors, while more individual
> contributors will be added during incubation.
>
> ASF members with a specific interest in the project are welcome to request
> being
> added to this list of initial committers.
>
> After the project has been accepted and started in the incubator,
> additional
> committers can join, as usual, based upon their merit in the project.
>
> *Bold* means that there has already been code contributed to NetBeans,
> while
> those without bold means that the contributor has an intention to
> contribute to
> Apache NetBeans while not having done so before. That does not mean that
> those
> in bold are better or worse, just that they'll be able to get started more
> quickly in Apache NetBeans since they've worked with the NetBeans source
> code
> before.
>
> Note: Some of the individual contributors listed below belong in multiple
> different categories, e.g., NetBeans Dream Team members are often NetBeans
> plugin developers too, etc, while some of those in the NetBeans Platform
> customers category are also NetBeans Dream Team members, etc.
>
>  * Individual contributors from the NetBeans team at Oracle.
>   1. *Dusan Balek*
>   2. *Jaroslav Havlin*
>   3. *Jiri Kovalsky*
>   4. *Jiri Prox*
>   5. *Jiri Sedlacek*
>   6. *Jiri Skrivanek*
>   7. *Libor Fischmeister*
>   8. *Martin Balin*
>   9. *Martin Entlicher*
>  10. *Miloslav Metelka*
>  11. *Milutin Kristofic*
>  12. *Ondrej Vrabec*
>  13. *Petr Gebauer*
>  14. *Petr Hejl*
>  15. *Petr Pisl*
>  16. *Svatopluk Dedic*
>  17. *Tomas Hurka*
>  18. *Tomas Mysik*
>  19. *Tomas Stupka*
>  20. *Tomas Zezula*
>
>  * Individual contributors from the Oracle Developer Studio team at Oracle.
>   1. *Alexander Simon*
>   2. *Danila Sergeyev*
>   3. *Dmitry Zharkov*
>   4. Don Kretsch
>   5. *Ilia Gromov*
>   6. Liang Chen
>   7. *Maria Dalmatova*
>   8. *Petr Kudriavtsev*
>   9. *Vladimir Kvashin*
>  10. *Vladimir Voskresensky*
>
>  * Individual contributors from the Oracle JET team at Oracle.
>   1. *Geertjan Wielenga*
>   2. *John Brock*
>
>  * Individual contributors from the Oracle Labs team at Oracle.
>   1. *Jaroslav Tulach*
>   2. Thomas Wuerthinger
>
>  * Individual contributors from the Java Platform Group at Oracle.
>   1. *Jan Lahoda*
>
>  * Individual contributors from NetBeans Platform customers.
>   1. Sven Reimers (Airbus Defence and Space)
>   2. Martin Klaehn (Airbus Defence and Space)
>   3. Florian Vogler (Airbus Defence and Space)
>   4. Jörg Michelberger (Airbus Defence and Space)
>   5. Norman Fomferra (European Space Agency)
>   6. Marco Peters (European Space Agency)
>   7. Tonio Fincke (European Space Agency)
>   8. Mike Kelly (US DOD)
>   9. Timon Veenstra (Corizon BV)
>  10. Kendrik Veenstra (Corizon BV)
>  11. Francesco Perez Duran (Corizon BV)
>  11. Christian Stolz (Janitza)
>  13. Ernest Lotter (Institute of Mine Seismology)
>  14. Neil C. Smith (Praxis LIVE)
>  15. Valentin Buergel (Simtec Buergel AG)
>  16. Stephen Cumminger (Sonideft)
>  17. Steven Yi (blue)
>  18. Henry Arousell (Björn Lundén Information AB)
>  19. Thomas Boqvist (Björn Lundén Information AB)
>  20. Zoran Sevarac (University of Belgrade)
>
>  * Individual contributors from ex-Sun and ex-Oracle employees.
>   1. James Gosling (Liquid Robotics)
>   2. Mike Duigou (Liquid Robotics)
>   3. *Jesse Glick*
>   4. *Milos Kleint* (Atlassian)
>   5. *Radim Kubacki* (currently NBAndroid.org)
>   6. *Ralph Benjamin Ruijs* (ex refactoring guru from NetBeans team, now at
>   Rockstars IT)
>   7. *Tim Boudreau* (ex window system guru from NetBeans team)
>   8. *Viktor Lapitsky* (dev/deployment/debug)
>
>  * Individual contributors from NetBeans Dream Team.
>   1. Aljoscha Rittner (ETable/Outline component features)
>   2. Andreas Stefik (accessibility features)
>   3. *Anton Epple* (DukeScript plugin from Dukehoff)
>   4. Aristides Villareal (documentation, testing)
>   5. *Benno Markiewicz* (various independent plugins)
>   6. Bruno Souza (SouJava)
>   7. Christian Lenz (website redesigner and more)
>   8. Constantin Drabo (testing, quality control)
>   9. David Heffelfinger (documentation in Java EE

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

[Wade Chandler]

On Sep 28, 2016 5:55 AM, "Sven Reimers"  wrote:
>
>
> 2. Use Maven repository as storahe backend for the plugin portal, so that
> only the metadata is hosted at the portal not the module binaries..
>

I think the terminology here is key. A "storage backend" for plugins.n.o.
Thus the current UI continues to work for users who are not perhaps self
hosting their plugins or building them to mvn central. I think plugins.n.o
can then be changed to support artifact coordinates as well, then plugin
authors can register them in multiple ways, and one of them upload and the
other meta-data plus coordinates. It could be future wise an archive type
could be uploaded to house all that extra plugin information or may already
be in the plugin itself...outside of screen shots, then then portal could
take only coordinate references without a version and automatically
reference the various versions over time, and be mostly automatic. We could
even drive more of this from DOAP registration (an Apache thing for those
who don't know) https://projects.apache.org/doap.html. Anyways, more later
when we get to an incubator.

Thanks

Wade

Re: NetBeans next steps

[Wade Chandler]

I have sent in my ICLA, and I received an acknowledgement it was received
and filed in the records. I have not received any other to suggest an ID
was created. When does that usually happen? Not a rush, but just so I know
the protocol.

Thanks

Wade

On Oct 1, 2016 11:35 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" 
wrote:

> Hi NetBeans mentors and initial committers,
>
> As per [0] I have updated podlings.xml and requested creation of the
> dev, users, commits and private lists via
> https://infra.apache.org/officers/mlreq/incubator, with Geertjan and
> myself as moderators [4] for now. I just took care of steps 1 to 3
> from [0] so far. I'll be mostly offline until Tuesday morning, if
> other mentors can take care of the remaining steps please go ahead!
>
> We will announce the availability of these lists here once they are
> created, along with subscription information. Everybody can subscribe
> to these lists except for the private one for which we'll send
> instructions to the dev list separately. But please wait for the lists
> to be created before subscribing, obviously ;-)
>
> NetBeans initial committers are welcome to already send in their iCLA
> [1] as well as cCLA [2] if desired. The iCLA is required to get an
> Apache account, while cCLA is between you and your employer but not
> required by the ASF. See [3] for which Apache IDs are already taken.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> [0] https://www.apache.org/dev/infra-contact#requesting-podling
> [1] https://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
> [2] https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-corporate.txt
> [3] http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html
> [4] https://reference.apache.org/pmc/ml
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: NetBeans next steps

[Wade Chandler]

Thanks John and Gj!

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com



> On Oct 3, 2016, at 06:25, Geertjan Wielenga 
>  wrote:
> 
> OK, thanks, will work with Wade and others who may be encountering this.
> 
> Gj
> 
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:20 PM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
> 
>> Wade,
>> 
>> ICLAs submitted before the vote don't get accounts created automatically.
>> Please reach out to your mentors to get your account created.
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> On Oct 3, 2016 06:06, "Wade Chandler"  wrote:
>> 
>>> I have sent in my ICLA, and I received an acknowledgement it was received
>>> and filed in the records. I have not received any other to suggest an ID
>>> was created. When does that usually happen? Not a rush, but just so I
>> know
>>> the protocol.
>>> 

Permission to edit the Incubator wiki on behalf of Apache NetBeans

[Wade Chandler]

All,

I haven’t seen any responses to my question of who will fill in the report, nor 
any messages from other NB community members to be able to edit the MoinMoin 
Wiki, so please give me permission to edit the page just in case we have to do 
this last minute. This will be our first time, and perhaps it will take us a 
couple times to get in the hang of this. My wiki user name is wadechandler.

Thanks much,

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com

Re: Permission to edit the Incubator wiki on behalf of Apache NetBeans

[Wade Chandler]

Thanks John


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com



> On Oct 29, 2016, at 10:20, John D. Ament  wrote:
> 
> Done, happy editing!
> 
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 10:16 AM Wade Chandler 
> wrote:
> 
>> All,
>> 
>> I haven’t seen any responses to my question of who will fill in the
>> report, nor any messages from other NB community members to be able to edit
>> the MoinMoin Wiki, so please give me permission to edit the page just in
>> case we have to do this last minute. This will be our first time, and
>> perhaps it will take us a couple times to get in the hang of this. My wiki
>> user name is wadechandler.
>> 
>> Thanks much,
>> 
>> Wade
>> 
>> 
>> ===
>> 
>> Wade Chandler
>> e: cons...@wadechandler.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: Incubator chat on Hipchat?

[Wade Chandler]

For the NetBeans community we had been using IRC, but then setup Slack, and
it has seen an uptick over IRC which per logging and notifications had been
harder to support and stay connected. We setup a sign up bot at
https://netbeans.signup.team, and we also have a chat room hooked/bridged
to our IRC channel, so we service both as a collective; good on mobiles
too. We have as an item to talk to Slack about OSS and limits/restrictions.

We don't intend it to replace mailing lists, Jira, nor the wiki, but look
at it as dynamic chats and community building allowing to have hack, help,
or real time hang time sessions. We didn't know about the Apache HipChat,
but I must confess I much prefer Slack having used both during my day job.

Wade

On Nov 3, 2016 10:50 AM, "Marvin Humphrey"  wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:23 PM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
> > Infra recently started leveraging hipchat.  A few PMCs have made use of
> > it.  I was wondering, would it be beneficial to anyone if we setup an
> > incubator room in hipchat?
>
> How about just promoting the #asf IRC channel on freenode.net?
>
>   https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#asf
>
> Better for podling contributors to make connections to the wider ASF
> rather than to limit themselves to the current incubator, and the #asf
> channel is already well established.
>
> We could even embed the Kiwi IRC client in an iframe on the Incubator
> website, at say http://incubator.apache.org/chat alongside guidance
> documenting how we expect real-time communications to be used.
>
> https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#asf";
> style="border:0; width:100%; height:450px;">
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Incubator chat on Hipchat?

[Wade Chandler]

Personally I tried gitter as GitHub was to come on-site at work, and
planned to use it, and the experience was quite horrible. Look at its app
reviews; I tend to agree with the low ones which get into its UX and
usability. Even creating a room or finding existing groups didn't seem to
work well (or at all) on mobile; at least Android. I may need to watch some
tutorials on it, but at least with Slack things just work; I agree the
limits etc can be annoying and working around them with bots or not relying
on logs etc. HipChat is OK from my experience, but Slack is unrivaled, but
certainly can be subjective.

Wade

On Nov 4, 2016 3:48 AM, "Stian Soiland-Reyes"  wrote:

> I think for external chats we should rather recommend Gitter, which has
> open rooms (anonymous lurking allowed) and "unlimited" searchable logs (and
> unlimited number of users) and don't require workarounds with a sign up
> bot.
>
> We did the same for Taverna, we tried an IRC chat, but its synchronous
> nature and lack of modern web support meant it was not too useful as we
> span timezones across the globe. We tried HipChat, but it somehow didn't
> kick off.
>
> Now that we tried Gitter (https://gitter.im/apache/taverna) we've seen a
> large increase in brainstorming and developer activity (and have to keep
> more of a watch to actively push decisions back to list. :-)). I think its
> email notifications is a good way to lure people back (or scare away!).
>
> The downside is that participation requires login with Twitter or GitHub,
> which some communities might have reasonable objections to.
>
> On 4 Nov 2016 2:33 am, "Wade Chandler"  wrote:
>
> > For the NetBeans community we had been using IRC, but then setup Slack,
> and
> > it has seen an uptick over IRC which per logging and notifications had
> been
> > harder to support and stay connected. We setup a sign up bot at
> > https://netbeans.signup.team, and we also have a chat room
> hooked/bridged
> > to our IRC channel, so we service both as a collective; good on mobiles
> > too. We have as an item to talk to Slack about OSS and
> limits/restrictions.
> >
> > We don't intend it to replace mailing lists, Jira, nor the wiki, but look
> > at it as dynamic chats and community building allowing to have hack,
> help,
> > or real time hang time sessions. We didn't know about the Apache HipChat,
> > but I must confess I much prefer Slack having used both during my day
> job.
> >
> > Wade
> >
> > On Nov 3, 2016 10:50 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" 
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:23 PM, John D. Ament 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Infra recently started leveraging hipchat.  A few PMCs have made use
> of
> > > > it.  I was wondering, would it be beneficial to anyone if we setup an
> > > > incubator room in hipchat?
> > >
> > > How about just promoting the #asf IRC channel on freenode.net?
> > >
> > >   https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#asf
> > >
> > > Better for podling contributors to make connections to the wider ASF
> > > rather than to limit themselves to the current incubator, and the #asf
> > > channel is already well established.
> > >
> > > We could even embed the Kiwi IRC client in an iframe on the Incubator
> > > website, at say http://incubator.apache.org/chat alongside guidance
> > > documenting how we expect real-time communications to be used.
> > >
> > > https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#asf";
> > > style="border:0; width:100%; height:450px;">
> > >
> > > Marvin Humphrey
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: board comments on incubator

[Wade Chandler]

On Dec 22, 2016 3:35 AM, "Pierre Smits"  wrote:

But, even if that occurs regularly, there are outside forces at play as
well. While there is a general consensus within the podling, these
outside forces express viewpoints that lead to Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.
This often has more to do with the independence (diversity) of the project
than the skills to create releases in an orderly fashion. I have seen it
happen.


Can you break this down for us in detail? Too, what does independence as a
function of diversity or vice versa mean in this context?

Thanks

Wade

Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts

[Wade Chandler]

On Jan 2, 2017 7:53 PM, "Pierre Smits"  wrote:


+1 Drop the -incubator/-incubating expectation of maven projects

It is not the code that is incubating.

Whether a project of the ASF has a status (podling, tlp, attic, etc.) is
irrelevant for the code. The code is donated/owned by the ASF, and tasks to
ensure that the code released is in conformance of the standards of the ASF
is delegated to the project. In the case of podlings, that responsibility
is delegated to the IPMC.
That a new project is going through the incubation phase is to ensure that
the community works in accordance with the principles and regulations of
the ASF (community over code, and such), and that the code is reworked to
something that can be released as code of the ASF.

For some open source is like a red flag. An addition like 'incubating'
could be regarded as worse. Is that what the ASF wants? This kind of
addition doesn't instil trust. It may influence potential adopters to stay
away of the code until the project has successfully gone through
incubation, It may influence potential contributors to not contribute until
graduation.


I agree with the sentiment expressed here. Projects which already have a
long history coming to ASF have valid releases, and the word "incubating"
has important meaning to policy and the ASF for Podlings, but for produced
artifacts it is about like 0.x releases. One shouldn't have to understand
ASF policy beyond the license to feel comfortable using ASF wares IMO, but
just an opinion.

Thanks

Wade

Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts

[Wade Chandler]

On Jan 3, 2017 7:06 AM, "Guillaume Laforge"  wrote:

When you say "it denotes a lack of maturity which is exactly the purpose
AFAIK", what do you mean my maturity?
Maturity in terms of how well it follows Apache processes and principles?
Or in terms of "the project is not ready for prime time"?

For example, for Apache Groovy, the project was very mature, and was
already 11 years old when it joined the ASF.
It was very stable, very mature, very solid.
And it was a bit weird to append "-incubating", as people thought it meant
"not ready for prime time" rather that "going through ASF incubation".
Furthermore it forced users to also change the appId although they usually
change only the version number, which might be in some property file
externally. It's not such a big big deal, but it's still something they had
to do, which is a bit unconvenient.


Agreed, and something NetBeans will face. But, surely users of a projects
artifacts use more information than the artifact versions to decide to use
a project. Though without specific reasoning on the project site about
versioning, I have seen, even within my company, 0.x versions have a bad
connotation; Dropwizard and Nodejs.

Too this is a new classifier that the tooling will have to know about in
its RCP and plugin developer support in the case of NetBeans, which will
only be relevant during the incubation phase. Without it, the tooling would
create invalid project files, so it has impacts outside of just the build
system for projects; some code changes on relevant to incubation.



I also second the idea that such a rule should apply to all kind of
artifacts or none, but not be an exception of Maven artifacts.
It doesn't make sense to enforce a rule for just one... and hence the idea
of lifting that rule altogether for everybody.


Also agreed. If it is important for the reasons noted, then it should be
just as important every where. If the tooling of various things cannot
support it, then perhaps it isn't something worth caring about broadly, but
then is it worth it at all if that is the case?

But too, isn't this is exactly what Maven SNAPSHOTS are about? A release is
a final thing whether it has some warts or not. So, if I have a mature
project going to Apache, its released artifacts should be something I can
depend on as well as the previous released artifacts if I trusted them
regardless if the project may not make another release. If I am using that
artifact from Central, it isn't magically going away.

As the project was donated to Apache, was the same risk not already in
existence or present before? This is an inherent risk with 3rd party
dependency whether COTS or OSS which often seems lost on the industry, and
adding an extra bit to the binary artifact isn't changing that.

Wade

Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts

[Wade Chandler]

On Jan 4, 2017 4:46 AM, "Jochen Theodorou"  wrote:

On 04.01.2017 07:28, Mark Struberg wrote:
[...]

I'm a bit surprised that groovy still uses the org.codehaus groupId, but I
> guess they have a deal with Ben (the former owner and thus (former?)
> copyright holder of 'Codehaus').
> So while this will work for now I guess that even groovy will move to
> org.apache.groovy in the long term (maybe with a new major version).
>

A new major version is a big thing for Groovy, but yes. In our view it is
the only realistic way, since people can expect breaking changes between
major versions and that includes in our view package names as well as group
ids.


It's not a big deal YET, but http://codehaus.org is not reachable anymore.
> And if anyone buys this domain he will have a much better position
> regarding trademarks than we do.
> What if someone buys the codehaus.org domain and publishes own artifacts
> under org.codehaus.groovy? Can we even prevent someone else to e.g publish
> org.codehaus.groovyng artifacts?
>

Assume we change and 2 months later somebody does that? How is the
situation then any better?

Actually I wonder if Ben would donate the domain to the ASF...


This would be a huge deal for NetBeans too. Too many projects based off of
it. The domain is being donated to Apache though AFAIK, but still, end
users shouldn't have to change so many sources or break other dependencies,
which may not be using the new package names, just because the package
names are org.netbeans and someone thinks they should be
org.apache.netbeans unless there is a true legal reason, and that would be
rare, but a different email thread I imagine, but way more complicated than
just changing the package name in the case of Groovy or NetBeans because we
are talking about whole ecosystems and dependency graphs.

Thanks

Wade

Re: Slack

[Wade Chandler]

My understanding is there isn’t a max limit on Slack for users for free, and I 
have confirmed this with Slack there is not supposed to be a limitation on 
numbers of members. NetBeans for instance has 320 members. Did someone tell you 
this or did you run into some issue? If so, you might write them to ask what is 
the deal.. It could be the difference in setup; we use a registration page 
which sends invitations https://netbeans.signup.team/ 
 and is using bots from https://stacktodo.com/ 
 Or, it could be something about when it was setup and 
differences in plans over time.

It doesn’t change the limits on the log and file storage, but we explain to 
folks it is for ephemeral real time communication and never to be considered 
historic, but we are looking into setting up a log bot which Slack personnel 
told us could also be helpful for OSS use. Slack said they don’t have plans for 
more features for OSS specific projects at the moment as one request from us 
was they make some new individual/personal low pay option which could help 
communities with dedicated membership to pay for their own personal use, but 
they said no plans at this time, but would take it into consideration as an 
idea.

Thanks,

Wade


> On Mar 26, 2017, at 01:58, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Slack is very convenient for quick communication, but clearly, it doesn't 
> change that the mailing list is the first communication channel. If 
> discussions happen on Slack, minute notes/discussion has to be forwarded on 
> the mailing list.
> 
> I wonder if we plan to ask for some "pro" Slack account for Apache projects 
> (as we have license for IntelliJ for example). Now, at Apache Beam, we 
> reached the max capacity of the Slack free version (90 Slack users on Beam 
> channel and limited history). We already received new member request that we 
> can't accept for now.
> 
> Thoughts ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 03/22/2017 10:37 PM, Craig Russell wrote:
>> Hi James,
>> 
>> There was a pretty extensive discussion on the netbeans dev list. I’d 
>> encourage you to review this thread 
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2dce365d03334c82d31b12c8b3dcad1a925a2f71af75658b8d8a5a07@%3Cdev.netbeans.apache.org%3E
>> 
>> You can get all of the messages in the thread by doing a quick search for 
>> “slack” on the d...@netbeans.apache.org list in lists.apache.org.
>> 
>> My takeaway is that Slack not a substitute for email. But it is useful for 
>> ping-pong communication when people are in the heat of development.
>> 
>> But no decisions are made on Slack, and any discussion there (aside from 
>> “add a semicolon there” and “let’s get lunch") needs to be brought back to 
>> the dev list.
>> 
>> The underlying principle is that “if it didn’t happen on dev, then it didn’t 
>> happen”. We strive for open, inclusive communications at Apache and that 
>> means attempting to encourage participation by everyone who wants to, 
>> regardless of primary language, time zone, and availability of tools. (We 
>> assume everyone has a device that handles email clients).
>> 
>> Hope this helps.
>> 
>> Craig
>> 
>>> On Mar 22, 2017, at 1:27 PM, James Bognar  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Can someone remind me?  I thought there was a discussion a couple of months
>>> ago about allowing incubator projects to use Slack for communication.  What
>>> was the final decision?
>> 
>> Craig L Russell
>> c...@apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: Slack

[Wade Chandler]

The 90 member thing is really odd to me. I think you should write Slack help to 
ask for details about your issue. The agreement does mention invites where 
people don’t accept, and too many of those, could reduce your ability to add 
more members, but this has been really rare in my experience, and we have way 
more for NetBeans, and other than perhaps 10 people, our over 300+ members were 
self invited using https://netbeans.signup.team/ 
<https://netbeans.signup.team/> Too, before I set all this up, one of the 
questions I specifically asked Slack was related to limitations, members, etc 
as it was a worry for us, and they said there is no real limit on the number of 
members, but did mention the message limits on logging etc, and directed us to 
setup a log bot while taking our request for some other OSS subscription models.

Hope it helps,

Wade



> On Mar 27, 2017, at 01:37, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  wrote:
> 
> Yes, but they will be member anyway, so it won't change the limit we have 
> today (90), right ?
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 03/27/2017 06:56 AM, Yaniv Rodenski wrote:
>> Hi JB,
>> 
>> A common practice/hack is to create a small web app that allows people to
>> send themselves invitations using the Slack API.
>> For example:
>> http://www.skill-space.com/blog/2015/11/16/create-an-auto-invite-channel-using-slack-heroku1
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Yaniv
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 at 3:40 pm, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Wade,
>>> 
>>> You are right: invite people on Slack means adding them as member.
>>> 
>>> However, how can we accept Slack participants without inviting them ? Is it
>>> possible ?
>>> 
>>> Thanks !
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> 
>>> On 03/26/2017 07:05 PM, Wade Chandler wrote:
>>>> My understanding is there isn’t a max limit on Slack for users for free,
>>> and I have confirmed this with Slack there is not supposed to be a
>>> limitation on numbers of members. NetBeans for instance has 320 members.
>>> Did someone tell you this or did you run into some issue? If so, you might
>>> write them to ask what is the deal.. It could be the difference in setup;
>>> we use a registration page which sends invitations
>>> https://netbeans.signup.team/ <https://netbeans.signup.team/> and is
>>> using bots from https://stacktodo.com/ <https://stacktodo.com/> Or, it
>>> could be something about when it was setup and differences in plans over
>>> time.
>>>> 
>>>> It doesn’t change the limits on the log and file storage, but we explain
>>> to folks it is for ephemeral real time communication and never to be
>>> considered historic, but we are looking into setting up a log bot which
>>> Slack personnel told us could also be helpful for OSS use. Slack said they
>>> don’t have plans for more features for OSS specific projects at the moment
>>> as one request from us was they make some new individual/personal low pay
>>> option which could help communities with dedicated membership to pay for
>>> their own personal use, but they said no plans at this time, but would take
>>> it into consideration as an idea.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> Wade
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 26, 2017, at 01:58, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Slack is very convenient for quick communication, but clearly, it
>>> doesn't change that the mailing list is the first communication channel. If
>>> discussions happen on Slack, minute notes/discussion has to be forwarded on
>>> the mailing list.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I wonder if we plan to ask for some "pro" Slack account for Apache
>>> projects (as we have license for IntelliJ for example). Now, at Apache
>>> Beam, we reached the max capacity of the Slack free version (90 Slack users
>>> on Beam channel and limited history). We already received new member
>>> request that we can't accept for now.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thoughts ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> JB
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 03/22/2017 10:37 PM, Craig Russell wrote:
>>>>>> Hi James,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There was a pretty extensive discussion on the netbeans dev list. I’d
>>> encourage you to review this thread https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
>>> 2dce365d03334c

Re: Slack

[Wade Chandler]

I have used Gitter; not a good product honestly; not really comparable. IRC
has limitations in the editing and group experience. The others require
keeping up infrastructure. Slack just works, and works well for what it
does. Some of us in the NB community discussed these points while setting
it up and choosing. Too, they have been letting communities use it for free
a long time. We use Atlassian products too, but don't get me going on
hipchat differences; one of which is the sed like comment editing oddness.

Thanks

Wade

On Mar 27, 2017 12:57 PM, "Phillip Rhodes" 
wrote:

> I don't understand the desire to use a closed-source, proprietary,
> locked-down walled-garden application like Slack to begin with.   Why
> not use one of the several open-source look-a-like versions that are
> available?  Or use Gitter, which is about to go Open Source[1].
>
> [1]: https://venturebeat.com/2017/03/15/gitlab-acquires-
> software-chat-startup-gitter-will-open-source-the-code/
>
>
> Phil
> This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Wade Chandler 
> wrote:
> > The 90 member thing is really odd to me. I think you should write Slack
> help to ask for details about your issue. The agreement does mention
> invites where people don’t accept, and too many of those, could reduce your
> ability to add more members, but this has been really rare in my
> experience, and we have way more for NetBeans, and other than perhaps 10
> people, our over 300+ members were self invited using
> https://netbeans.signup.team/ <https://netbeans.signup.team/> Too, before
> I set all this up, one of the questions I specifically asked Slack was
> related to limitations, members, etc as it was a worry for us, and they
> said there is no real limit on the number of members, but did mention the
> message limits on logging etc, and directed us to setup a log bot while
> taking our request for some other OSS subscription models.
> >
> > Hope it helps,
> >
> > Wade
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Mar 27, 2017, at 01:37, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes, but they will be member anyway, so it won't change the limit we
> have today (90), right ?
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> JB
> >>
> >> On 03/27/2017 06:56 AM, Yaniv Rodenski wrote:
> >>> Hi JB,
> >>>
> >>> A common practice/hack is to create a small web app that allows people
> to
> >>> send themselves invitations using the Slack API.
> >>> For example:
> >>> http://www.skill-space.com/blog/2015/11/16/create-an-
> auto-invite-channel-using-slack-heroku1
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Yaniv
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 at 3:40 pm, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Wade,
> >>>>
> >>>> You are right: invite people on Slack means adding them as member.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, how can we accept Slack participants without inviting them ?
> Is it
> >>>> possible ?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks !
> >>>> Regards
> >>>> JB
> >>>>
> >>>> On 03/26/2017 07:05 PM, Wade Chandler wrote:
> >>>>> My understanding is there isn’t a max limit on Slack for users for
> free,
> >>>> and I have confirmed this with Slack there is not supposed to be a
> >>>> limitation on numbers of members. NetBeans for instance has 320
> members.
> >>>> Did someone tell you this or did you run into some issue? If so, you
> might
> >>>> write them to ask what is the deal.. It could be the difference in
> setup;
> >>>> we use a registration page which sends invitations
> >>>> https://netbeans.signup.team/ <https://netbeans.signup.team/> and is
> >>>> using bots from https://stacktodo.com/ <https://stacktodo.com/> Or,
> it
> >>>> could be something about when it was setup and differences in plans
> over
> >>>> time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It doesn’t change the limits on the log and file storage, but we
> explain
> >>>> to folks it is for ephemeral real time communication and never to be
> >>>> considered historic, but we are looking into setting up a log bot
> which
> >>>> Slack personnel told us could also be helpful for OSS use. Slack said
> they
> >>>> don’t have plans for more features for OSS specific projects at the
> moment
>

Re: ASF hosted binaries collecting user data without an explicit opt-in

[Wade Chandler]

NetBeans has various anonymous data collections such as UI gestures and
actions logging, and optional uploading, sort of like GA, which tells us
what is or is not being used, auto update, exception reporting, driven by
users deciding to send anonymously or login to attach their name, which I
do that often. There may be others. So certainly good for us to be aware
of, and will have to bring it up.

Thanks

Wade


On Jun 6, 2017 8:34 AM, "Shane Curcuru"  wrote:

> While there may be technical issues out there, the policy issues can
> have time for a thorough discussion before we make policy updates.
>
> Alex Harui wrote on 6/5/17 11:25 PM:
> > Is the use of Google Analytics also prohibited by #4?
>
> That sounds like a different issue, unless a project is shipping docs
> inside a release with GA code *in* the html docs that are then run when
> a user installs the docs locally.  That would not be a good idea, BTW.
>
> As Bertrand notes elsethread, GA on *.apache.org websites is fine as
> long as the PMC is sure to comply with the ASF privacy policy:
>
>   https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/privacy.html
>
> Separately, we have one example of auto-update checking which is OK:
>
>   https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Update_Service
>
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 6/5/17, 8:16 PM, "shaposh...@gmail.com on behalf of Roman Shaposhnik"
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the explanation, Roman. I had no idea that policies for
> >>> hosted binaries
> >>> were stricter than for source code (other than the obvious effect on
> >>> licensing when you bundle in dependencies).
> >>
> >> Btw, this one is serious enough that I'd like us to update our release
> >> policy based on the
> >> learnings here.
> >>
> >> So far it seems that there's an agreement on that having this type of
> >> capability...
> >>   1 ... in the source code disabled by default -- totally OK
> >>   2 ... in the source code enabled by default -- questionable, but OK
> >>   3 ... in the binary hosted by ASF disabled by default -- OK
> >>   4 ... in the binary hosted by ASF enabled by default -- NOT OK
> >>
> >> #4 can get nuanced if we want to invest in ASF managed infrastructure
> >> that is
> >> responsible for update tracking and user data collection. With my ASF
> hat
> >> on,
> >> I'd say that INFRA should probably stay away from user data
> >> collection/retention.
> >>
> >> That still leaves a possibility of a a ping/pong API that only
> >> consumes a name of ASF
> >> project and its version and returns a JSON object of some kind as per
> >> PMC choice.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Roman.
> >>
>
> --
>
> - Shane
>   https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Project informal discussion

[Wade Chandler]

You should also checkout something like Graal and Truffle
https://github.com/graalvm/graal/blob/master/truffle/README.md

Wade


On Jul 18, 2017 02:01, "Jochen Theodorou"  wrote:

> On 18.07.2017 02:53, Harrison & Wells wrote:
>
>> # I'm just a beginner here, please ignore any stupidities
>> So guys, you told me to discuss my project here first.
>> Well, I have an idea of making a source code generator.
>> There really isn't a source code generation library.And it can be done.
>> It is really useful,just like BCEL, I think there should be one for
>> source.
>>
>> For example, when one is making a compiler compiler,it will be quite
>> handy.
>> I haven't written any source at the moment, but when I do,can I start my
>> packages with org.apache.
>> Because,it's gonna be real cool.
>>
>>
> I think you will have to give this a lot more flesh. Right now I can
> imagine everything from a simple templating engine up to a compiler
> generator like antlr
>
> bye Jochen
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Urgent: Regarding Java package name change to org.apache.*

[Wade Chandler]

> 
> 
> On Aug 3, 2017, at 12:25, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> OK, so to summarize a more refined recommendation:
> 
> 1) package names with reverse domains MUST be renamed before graduation or
> have an IPMC approved plan for renaming

NetBeans uses org.netbeans, and the domain is also being donated to Apache. It 
is not just an IDE, but is also a rich client platform, like Eclipse, so I 
don’t think just a reverse domain name should be justification for MUST. Surely 
part of the decision takes into consideration the life of the project along 
with what that reverse domain is.

> 2) Projects who expect that their future users outnumber current users are
> highly encouraged to rename packages
> 3) Other projects are not required to rename packages and backward
> compatibility is sufficient reason to not rename packages.
> 
> Or should #2 also be a MUST?

Thanks,

Wade

Re: Urgent: Regarding Java package name change to org.apache.*

[Wade Chandler]

On Aug 4, 2017 10:37, "Andy Seaborne"  wrote:



On 04/08/17 13:09, Shane Curcuru wrote:

> John D. Ament wrote on 8/4/17 7:59 AM:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:17 AM Shane Curcuru 
>> wrote:
>>
> ...snip...
>
>> - Other reverse domain names *really* should change to org.apache;
>>> otherwise it's just confusing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Agreed.  The one caveat to all this is the implementation of javax.
>> namespace which is typically required and managed by the Geronimo TLP
>> (typically).
>>
> ...snip...
>
> Good point - any package names where there's a well-known technical
> standard that specifies package names takes precedence for naming.
> That's what a normal user would expect, and they also (typically)
> understand there's a difference between the standard API names and the
> actual implementation of the API they've downloaded.
>
>
We seem to have lost the community impact.  Projects with a existing
pre-ASF history can have a halo of support in tutorials, books, etc (not
from the donating corp) that all contribute to the success of a project.

The principle that the project outputs come from Apache can be achieved in
various ways.  State the principle not the mechanism.


I agree with this. The move to Apache should be seen as a positive by
everyone including users. If the first thing they have to do is change
package names just to go from what may likely be a trivial update likewise,
that is not very positive; especially if a domain and name, trademarks, are
donated to Apache. There is also the notion of having artifacts that still
run on older versions of a system as well in some cases, such as plugins
and 3rd party library creators, so heavier support burden.

Anyways, I am just addressing all the worry about Apache branding etc. That
branding will be every where; lists, sites, articles, etc. I seriously do
not believe a stable and well known projects package names will be a major
source of confusion. It seems to me, most people I have talked to or worked
with in the industry know how open source donations work, and package names
are generally not the major indicator of ownership when transfers happen;
folks tend to be aware of ecosystem changes and impacts. Maybe some young
and junior folks not yet schooled in the way of the Jedi will have some,
but that is the role of mentoring.

IMHO, thanks,

Wade

Re: [LAZY] Letting anyone invite on Slack

[Wade Chandler]

We do this with ours:

https://netbeans.signup.team

The Slack guys are the ones who even told us to. There is no theoretical
limit according to them. You just have to manage the outstanding invites,
and clean them up if there are a bunch where folks did not finish out the
process. If you do not, then invites won't work until you do after some
critical mass.

We also use a bot to do this, which the Slack folks recommended us do:
https://netbeans.slackarchive.io

There are probably some OSS bots ASF could use to do this and other things
for such systems to keep full data logs inside ASF; own the data forever.

We also have a channel linked to our IRC channel where we can monitor and
help with it from Slack.

Anyways, it all seems to work great so far.

Thanks

Wade


On Oct 13, 2017 23:52, "Henri Yandell"  wrote:

Currently only 'admins' can invite people to the ASF Slack:

  https://the-asf.slack.com/

If we view it as an IRC equivalent, having to invite people at all is
weird. We can, via a checkbox, change it so anyone on the ASF Slack (except
'guests') can invite someone to the Slack workspace:



Invitations

Choose whether to allow non-admins to invite new people to *ASF*.

 Allow everyone (except guests) to invite new members.


I can't see why we'd have an issue there, so I'm planning to turn that
checkbox on at the end of next week (Thursday or whenever I remember to
after that :) ).

If this is a bad idea, please object and let me know why :)

Hen

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

[Wade Chandler]

+1

On Oct 21, 2017 08:07, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:

> +1 IPMC binding
>
> LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good.
>
> However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with
> java8 144 I sometimes get test errors.
> All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different:
>
>
> Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator
> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.NetworkListener
> start
> INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572]
> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer start
> INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started.
> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451 sec
> <<< FAILURE!
> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx)
> Time elapsed: 0.03 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting:
> null actual: Last
> at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217)
> at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest.
> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73)
>
>
> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772 sec
> <<< FAILURE!
> rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx)  Time elapsed: 0.067 sec  <<<
> FAILURE!
> netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException:
> java.lang.NullPointerException
> at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_
> html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71)
> at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source)
> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> at sun.reflect.misc.MethodUtil.invoke(MethodUtil.java:275)
> at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.lambda$fwkInvokeWithContext$
> 60(Utilities.java:94)
> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.fwkInvokeWithContext(
> Utilities.java:94)
> at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.callImpl(Native Method)
> at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.call(JSObject.java:115)
> at org.netbeans.html.boot.fx.AbstractFXPresenter$JSFn.invokeImpl(
> AbstractFXPresenter.java:418)
>
> Failed tests:
>   KOFx.run:73 » JS netscape.javascript.JSException:
> java.lang.NullPointerExcepti...
>
>
> Running the build for the forth time made it succeed.
> I'd say it's not a blocker for the release, but we might improve the test
> setup.
>
>
> txs for rolling the release!
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 21.10.2017 um 14:04 schrieb John D. Ament :
> >
> > Here's my +1 to release.
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:43 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Jaroslav Tulach
> >>  wrote:
> >>> ...I'd like to ask you to hold the Incubator
> >>> PMC vote to release:..
> >>
> >> Here's my +1 repeated from the podling list for
> >>
> >> SHA1(incubating-netbeans-html4j-1.5.zip)=
> >> fd77975f1adbcbc4b926e1cfab6865f47db6df3c
> >>
> >> Jaroslav's GPG key is included in
> >> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/netbeans.asc
> >>
> >> -Bertrand
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

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

[Wade Chandler]

https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes

It is technically both with nuances. Time and 3 binding +1s plus a majority
+1s. The 72 hours is a participation enabler. The 3 bindings is the minimum
required, but a majority -1s would be a big deal. Even though there is no
veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might
postpone a release as well, even after +1s.

Wade



On Oct 21, 2017 08:55, "Geertjan Wielenga" 
wrote:

> Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding
> votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator.
>
> How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, i.e.,
> at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding
> votes, then the release of this specific repo that is one of the repose of
> Apache NetBeans is approved?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gj
>
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Mark Struberg 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 IPMC binding
> >
> > LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good.
> >
> > However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with
> > java8 144 I sometimes get test errors.
> > All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different:
> >
> >
> > Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator
> > Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.
> server.NetworkListener
> > start
> > INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572]
> > Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer
> start
> > INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started.
> > Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451
> sec
> > <<< FAILURE!
> > displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org.
> netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx)
> > Time elapsed: 0.03 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> > java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting:
> > null actual: Last
> > at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217)
> > at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest.
> > displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> > NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> > at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73)
> >
> >
> > Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772
> sec
> > <<< FAILURE!
> > rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx)  Time elapsed: 0.067 sec  <<<
> > FAILURE!
> > netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException:
> > java.lang.NullPointerException
> > at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_
> > html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> > NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> > at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71)
> > at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source)
> > at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(
> > DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
> > at sun.reflect.misc.MethodUtil.invoke(MethodUtil.java:275)
> > at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.lambda$fwkInvokeWithContext$
> > 60(Utilities.java:94)
> > at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
> > at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.fwkInvokeWithContext(
> > Utilities.java:94)
> > at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.callImpl(Native Method)
> > at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.call(JSObject.java:115)
> > at org.netbeans.html.boot.fx.AbstractFXPresenter$JSFn.
> invokeImpl(
> > AbstractFXPresenter.java:418)
> >
> > Failed tests:
> >   KOFx.run:73 » JS netscape.javascript.JSException:
> > java.lang.NullPointerExcepti...
> >
> >
> > Running the build for the forth time made it succeed.
> > I'd say it's not a blocker for the release, but we might improve the test
> > setup.
> >
> >
> > txs for rolling the release!
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> > > Am 21.10.2017 um 14:04 schrieb John D. Ament :
> > >
> > > Here's my +1 to release.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:43 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > > bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Jaroslav Tulach
> > >>  wrote:
> > >>> ...I'd like to ask you to hold the Incubator
> > >>> PMC vote to release:..
> > >>
> > >> Here's my +1 repeated from the podling list for
> > >>
> > >> SHA1(incubating-

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

[Wade Chandler]

+1 non-binding

On Sun, May 27, 2018, 17:32 Mark Struberg  wrote:

> Hi folks!
>
> Justin, thanks for talking such a deep look and catching those flaws,
> really appreciated!
>
> Here is my personal view: It's just test data, and if we can guarantee
> that the test data is IP clean then it's not a problem.
> I remember other ASF projects which have class files compiled with old
> Java versions checked in as class files. They are used to verify backward
> compatibility of our bytecode parsers (proxy logic). And of course you
> cannot ever build those within the same build! Afair we also committed the
> orignal Java sources with a comment about how to reproduce those.
> Or in the maven-scm-providers-svn and maven-scm-providers-git we do this
> as well. There we have a zip of a .svn and .git repos to verify the repo
> functionality. That's perfectly fine as long as the content is cleared.
>
> I've went through all of those zips [1] and verified them. Most contain
> just extremely simple sample XSDs. The zips are on the Oracle contribution
> list. So they are covered by the code drop. I think it's not a show stopper
> as they are dead simple and contain no IP able content, but to have it even
> more polished we might later re-package them and add an ALv2 LICENSE file
> to the zip files (just to be dead sure).
> The Java parts are either empty jars (funny that an Oracle project has
> something cmpiled with Azul Zulu btw ;) ) or dead simple (just method
> signature with empty body). So nothiing which constitutes originary IP
> again.
>
> Rest looks fine, so
>
> +1
>
> from me (binding).
>
> txs and LieGrue,
> strub
>
> [1]
> ~/tmp/delete/incubating-netbeans-java-9.0-rc1-source$>find . -name "*.zip"
> ./projectimport.eclipse.core/test/unit/data/myeclipselibstest.zip
>
> ./websvc.saas.codegen/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/websvc/saas/codegen/JavaApplication.zip
> ./mercurial/test/qa-functional/data/JavaApp_repo.zip
> ./mercurial/test/qa-functional/data/files/pp.zip
> ./ide.kit/test/qa-functional/data/biglist.zip
> ./subversion/test/unit/data/SvnWcParserData.zip
> ./subversion/test/qa-functional/data/files/pp.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve12.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve13.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve11.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve10.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve14.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve15.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve8.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve9.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/performance1.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/performance2.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/cyclic_dependencies.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve4.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve5.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve7.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve6.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve2.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve3.zip
>
> ./xml.schema.model/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/xml/schema/model/resources/resolve1.zip
> ./git/test/qa-functional/data/files/pp.zip
>
> > Am 27.05.2018 um 10:29 schrieb Emilian Bold  >:
> >
> > Silly question but must Apache releases include test data?
> >
> > Is there a restriction on such minor binary files in the repository or
> just binary files in the release zip?
> >
> > I see no problem excluding all the tests in future NetBeans releases.
> >
> > --emi
> >
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> >
> > On 27 May 2018 7:36 AM, Jan Lahoda  wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Justin Mclean
> jus...@classsoftware.com
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
>  I wonder where exactly (most) of these files come from.
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, many apologies, and my mistake as I looked at your last release
> by
> >>>
> >>> accident. Changing my vote to +0 (binding).
> >>>
> >>> I can still see the md5 hashes in the office release area [1] these
> should
> >>>
> >>> be removed (but that’s a minor issue).
> >>>
> >>> Re unexpected binary files it’s not open source if it contains
> >>>
> >>> unmodifiable code, that’s usually a cl

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

[Wade Chandler]

IMO something real is missing from this whole conversation.

Does the ASF want to have successful projects? Honest question time. Would 
Tomcat have been successful if there had been source only downloads with no 
“official" runnable software? Were all those users for all those years 
compiling their own? No. They downloaded clearly official binaries. Does this 
page tomcat.apache.org tell an internet wonderer BEWARE…the binaries are not 
official? What about this one https://tomcat.apache.org/download-90.cgi … 
pretty sure the sources are the last thing on the page.

Was Maven successful because everyone built it? No. They downloaded what is 
clearly considered “official” binaries. This site http://maven.apache.org … 
what does it point out…unofficial binaries? No…download, install, run.

NetBeans…not going to make it here on “unofficial" binary releases funny 
business. What company wants someone installing that on their system? Security 
policies anyone? Sorry, just the truth.

httpd benefited from Linux distros binary distribution in this sense of 
releases as source, but if everyone had to “build” their httpd servers, it 
would not have been the success it has been; I think it is irrefutable. It’s 
success was not based on a bunch of admins who are not software engineers 
building it, nor was it built on web developers building C binaries; some of us 
maybe building ISAPI and NSAPI modules; that’s been a bit.

This whole conversation is missing a crucial point, and it is does Apache want 
to continue to be successful? And, do folks really understand how it has been 
successful to date? It wasn’t just those of us who contribute code. It was also 
people using that code, and most of those folks did not compile it.

Read this whole thread to this point. Does it even make sense? Is there a clear 
answer? It is just as confusing to this point as when the question was asked.

It is still a bunch of indirect dancing around of how the users need binaries, 
but some language needs to be there to make sure they (users) understand it is 
unofficial, and not really from Apache like the source code, but some how 
“convenience” from “some magic place". It leaves off the one point that really 
matters in the end; users using software makes successful projects and brings 
and retains donations; simple calculation. Do people use untrusted software? 
Not in commercial settings. I think this is exactly why “binary releases are 
NOT endorsed by ASF” will not fly very far.

There is a lot of time and resources wrapped up in these type conversations as 
well as Apache projects. Real clear guidance seems a must, and it has to be 
“real” and honest about what the decision means for successful projects.

Thank you,

Wade



> On Nov 13, 2018, at 3:49 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> 
> Personally, given the amount of binary releases that are distributed off of
> our very own infrastructure (and I'm not even counting our namespace
> on things like Docker hub -- I'm just talking about the INFRA we run) I don't
> think that the argument "binary releases are NOT endorsed by ASF" will
> fly very far.
> 
> I think the best defense for us is to, perhaps, position them as UGC, but
> given the practices around existing PMC I don't think that would be easy to
> do.
> 
> So the question really boils down to -- how much of a liability this could
> potentially be for us?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 4:55 PM Daniel Shahaf  > wrote:
>> 
>> CC += legal-discuss@ since this really isn't an incubator-specific topic any
>> more.  The context is precompiled binary artifacts on
>> https://www.apache.org/dist/.
>> 
>> David Nalley wrote on Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 17:06:50 -0500:
>>> So let's assume a PMC (or PPMC) goes through the same process with
>>> binaries in terms of reviewing, voting on, promoting, and publishing
>>> to the world a binary release on behalf of the PMC and Foundation.
>>> Binaries are published to the same location that source tar balls are
>>> - are featured on download pages provided by the ASF. Perhaps even
>>> with the situation being that people download the binary artifacts
>>> from ASF resources tens of thousands, or maybe even millions of times
>>> more frequently than the source tarballs.
>>> 
>>> From that scenario I have some questions:
>>> 
>>> 1. Would a reasonable person (or jury) suspend disbelief long enough
>>> to consider our protestations that our 'releases' are source only, and
>>> that as a Foundation we didn't release, propagate, promote, or
>>> distribute the binaries in question? A rose by any other name.
>>> 2. Should the Board be taking an active interest in projects (release
>>> managers?) who promote and publish their binaries in this manner on
>>> our hardware?
>>> 3. Is lack of Board action tantamount to tacit approval of this
>>> behavior? Can we really claim ignorance?
>>> 4. Should Infrastructure be actively monitoring and removing binaries
>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Netbeans 11.0 (incubating) [vote candidate 4]

[Wade Chandler]

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 21:43 Justin Mclean  wrote:

>
> Theres are the binary inclusions that seem to contain compiled code, an
> ASF release should not include this:
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/com-example-testmodule-cluster.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-brokendepending.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-depending.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-depending_on_new_one_engine.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-engine-1-1.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-engine-1-2.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-engine.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-executable-permissions.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-fragment.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-independent-1-1.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-independent.nbm
>   B
>  
> ./platform/autoupdate.services/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/api/autoupdate/data/org-yourorghere-refresh_providers_test.nbm
>

To be clear, this is test data; not binary dependencies. Note the names of
those files. NetBeans has a module system, and those have nbm extensions.
These nbms are made to test very specific things that can be wrong in
modules. This would be like having tests for C/C++ linkers and object files
etc where you just want to validate the linking not rebuilding object files
for tests; rebuilding those every test run adds build time for no gain.
Make sense, and Ok?

Thanks

Wade

Re: Voting on releases with serious unaddressed issues

[Wade Chandler]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 13:03 Ross Gardler  wrote:

> Opinions were asked for. I gave mine.
>
> I have tried to do it before and been squashed repeatedly because my
> opinion is not broadly supported. I should not have said board must as it
> has been brought here recently and did not find support.
>

I appreciate your input on this thread very much and thanks.

Wade

Re: Voting on releases with serious unaddressed issues

[Wade Chandler]

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 22:34 Justin Mclean  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The  Netbeans RC is an interesting one as they:
> - Have made several releases before.
> - Have been given advice from the IPMC on serious issues and what to fix.
> - Looks like nothing has been done to correct those issues.
>
> Now I know we’re trying to be more lenient on releases but we still have
> to draw the line somewhere and this is not their first release. The the
> binary in source code, license issues copyright issues on the cute cat and
> rabbit photos [1] probably mean that they cannot put that release in the
> ASF distribution area even if they do get 3 +1s without legal and infra
> approval.
>
> What do other IPMC members think?
>

Interestingly though there is a Jira issue related to these items of which
you speak, and there has been mentor input on them; have you covered these
with our mentors as an example? This thread seems a little (maybe quite)
premature; maybe some disconnect. This discussion actually seems more
appropriate in the NetBeans channels, and in fact please see the referenced
issues and comments in those channels including release 10 and the one this
is related to, 11, where addressing these issues has been specifically
discussed with you Justin.

Thanks

Wade

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Netbeans 11.0 (incubating) [vote candidate 4]

[Wade Chandler]

Thanks so much Justin and for your involvement.

Wade

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 17:21 Justin Mclean  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Changing my vote to:
> +1 (binding)
>
> And I’m sorry for any upset my first vote caused.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache NetBeans (incubating) 11.0 released

[Wade Chandler]

Great job Lazlo and everyone else; thanks so much for all your hard work!
This is awesome news!

Wade

On Thu, Apr 4, 2019, 18:57 Laszlo Kishalmi  wrote:

> The Apache NetBeans team is proud to announce the release of Apache
> NetBeans (incubating) 11.0.
>
> Apache NetBeans (incubating) 11.0 constitutes all cluster in the Apache
> NetBeans Git repo, which together provide the NetBeans Platform (i.e., the
> underlying application framework), as well as all the modules that provide
> the Java SE, Java EE, PHP, JavaScript and Groovy features of Apache
> NetBeans.
>
> In short, Apache NetBeans (incubating) 11.0 is a full IDE for Java SE,
> Java EE, PHP and JavaScript development with some Groovy language support.
>
> Read more on our download page:
>
> https://netbeans.apache.org/download/nb110/nb110.html
>
> New & Noteworthy features of the 11.0 Release:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+11.0+New+and+Noteworthy
>
> See the below for the donation status of features that have not been
> donated or included in Apache builds yet, i.e., are not part of Apache
> NetBeans (incubating) 11.0, e.g., features for working with C/C++,
> JavaCard,
> and more:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+Transition
>
> Work is being done on bringing netbeans.org to Apache. In the
> meantime, refer to the below for all details related to Apache
> NetBeans:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS
>
> Laszlo Kishalmi
> on behalf of Apache NetBeans PPMC
>
>
> Apache NetBeans is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.
> Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further
> review indicates that the infrastructure, communications, and decision
> making process have stabilized in a manner consistent with other
> successful ASF projects. While incubation status is not necessarily a
> reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it does
> indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Recommend 'Apache NetBeans graduation to Top Level Project' resolution to board

[Wade Chandler]

Great news indeed! Thanks and congratulations to everyone who has
contributed in any way including the Apache mentors Bertrand, Ate, Daniel,
and Jim.

A big special thanks to Geertjan, Jirka, Jarda, Tim, Jesse, Bruno, Milos,
Tomas, Jan, and all the other old hats from NetBeans including the NBDT
members; a lot of years and hard work behind all of this; decades!

Everything we ever did looks like it will have a long and open life! I'm so
proud of you all.

After Bruno Souza and some of us started the "Dream Team" (say that without
feeling cheesy), we created a mission statement:

"The NetBeans Dream Team strives to make the NetBeans open source project
more accessible to our user, contributor, and partner communities."

Geertjan and Jirka helped us carry on that mission.

I can't think of a better way to complete it than here at Apache with it's
open and passion driven model "The Apache Way" and a TLP. Can it be more
accessible?!

Thanks for all the great years of fun, experiences and learning! Here's to
more!

Wade

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 07:18 Geertjan Wielenga
 wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Many thanks for the enthusiasm and encouragement -- the vote thread[1] has
> been open for 72 hours and the vote has passed:
>
> 18 +1 votes (and no 0 or -1 votes).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Geertjan
> on behalf of Apache NetBeans
>
> [1]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9d7c5d2048f8050fa0e438c5b14ea75c60a52ef479694f79f32e86b6@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>