On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
wrote:
> So it is acceptable if the podling release has no new features and no bugs
> fixed, i.e., no new code at all?...
>From the Incubator's point of view, it's absolutely fine.
In the extreme (but don't
On 2 March 2017 at 11:10, Geertjan Wielenga
wrote:
> So it is acceptable if the podling release has no new features and no bugs
> fixed, i.e., no new code at all? Right now, we have NetBeans IDE 8.2. I
> guess that means we would make that podling release
Of course, some bug fixes, some minor enhancements etc.
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 02. März 2017 um 12:10 Uhr
> Von: "Geertjan Wielenga" <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com>
> An: dev@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Two-phased code donation proposal
>
>
So it is acceptable if the podling release has no new features and no bugs
fixed, i.e., no new code at all? Right now, we have NetBeans IDE 8.2. I
guess that means we would make that podling release NetBeans IDE 8.2.1 to
indicate that it is really a minor release? But still the expectation would
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
wrote:
> ...The
> release will not have any new features and will not have any bugs fixed,
> instead it will purely and only have gone through all the licensing checks
> and requirements from the Apache side...
It's trivial to support contributions in the interim.
Work on the donated modules will happen in the canonical Apache repository
while work on the rest of the modules will happen in the Oracle repository.
At the end you convert the whole Mercurial repository and re-apply all the
patches.
+1, this looks like a good decision to me.
On Wed, 2017-03-01 at 10:45 +0200, Emilian Bold wrote:
> +1
>
> This will split the history in half but I believe we can re-apply the
> intermediate Apache commits when we do have the full codebase and
> preserve
> the full history.
>
>
> --emi
>
>
I don't believe they can shut down the old repo until everything has been
donated.
--emi
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Javier Ortiz
wrote:
> Sounds reasonable. My concern would be changes in between. Will this mean
> the current main repo would be shut down and
Sounds reasonable. My concern would be changes in between. Will this mean
the current main repo would be shut down and using the new one instead?
+1
This will split the history in half but I believe we can re-apply the
intermediate Apache commits when we do have the full codebase and preserve
the full history.
--emi
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at
That is a sane sugestion. +1
Le 01/03/2017 à 00:20, Geertjan Wielenga a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to propose a two-phased code donation -- the first for all the
> parts necessary for building a Java SE distribution of NetBeans IDE and the
> second for all the other parts.
>
> I.e., the
Hi all,
I'd like to propose a two-phased code donation -- the first for all the
parts necessary for building a Java SE distribution of NetBeans IDE and the
second for all the other parts.
I.e., the first code donation would be 5a-d in the link below and the
second code donation would be 5e-f in
12 matches
Mail list logo