On 15/01/18 21:58, Emilian Bold wrote:
[...] Jan probably needs help.
Sure he does.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.incubator.apache
> It's not about new features, it's about not losing existing ones!
+1
I keep planning on jumping onto the -javac branch. Jan probably needs help.
--emi
> Original Message ----
>Subject: Re: Users first (was Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed)
>Local Time
On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 at 10:51 Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> OK, here it is: https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/361
Huh, what's with that description?!
Guess we need good guidelines on PR titles and descriptions? Not to mention
rejecting any that ad
Hi,
On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 at 09:02 Eduard Karel de Jong
wrote:
> yet I like to support NB as it moves into open source, by
> sharing some of my experiences with open organisations and democratic
> decisions in standardisation and in (city) politics.
>
Interesting read. It seems you and I have si
On 13/01/18 11:47, Gili T. wrote:
I guess I'll be the odd man out: the bigger the project the more relevant
cosmetic fixes are in my opinion. Why? Because in the 10+ years I've used
NetBean, bug fixes were more important to me than new features. Cosmetic
fixes tend to reduce the bug count at th
I don't think anyone is pretending anything. :-) The point is simply
we can't do everything at the same time -- but since you care about
these kinds of issues, you're very welcome to review them, there's
nothing stopping you.
I agree we do need to document our desired coding style and need to
set
It seems to me that maybe you need to document your desired coding style
and perhaps ask people to break PRs into smaller pieces but beyond that I
see nothing wrong with someone reducing the number of compiler warnings in
a PR and nothing else.
Code hygine is a necessary part of software developme
OK, here it is: https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/361
Looking forward to your review,
Gj
On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Gili T. wrote:
> I guess I'll be the odd man out: the bigger the project the more relevant
> cosmetic fixes are in my opinion. Why? Because in the 10+ years
I guess I'll be the odd man out: the bigger the project the more relevant
cosmetic fixes are in my opinion. Why? Because in the 10+ years I've used
NetBean, bug fixes were more important to me than new features. Cosmetic
fixes tend to reduce the bug count at the cost of new features and I'm
certain
I can't agree more with Antonio and Geertjan: as a community we need to
keep our eyes focussed on the goal: delivering a superior IDE to
developers. And doing so in a timely fashion.
My earlier suggestions about voting to move forward with a beta release
intended to support keeping that focus.
Hi,
My 2 cents: I agree with Geertjan: I think we should concentrate our
efforts in the best NetBeans 9 we can build for users. There're many
important things to do, ranging from the website to the jdk-javac
branch. And many new tools to control, ranging from the wiki to the very
slow JIRA is
11 matches
Mail list logo
