incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal
Date Sat, 24 Sep 2016 13:18:44 GMT
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:


> Correct.  The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the
> community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes - and a
> key point of self-governance is responsibly adding new committers.
>
> In my experience, it's far better to just start incubation at this point
> rather than worrying about getting the *initial* list perfect.


The perspective on this point are clearly extremely divided when I read
through this thread. Some from Apache consider the initial committers list
extremely important and that that list should be extremely complete. (And
there's even a suggestion that people might fork NetBeans if they're not on
the initial committers list which, to me, sounds really odd.) Others
consider the initial committers list to be an indicator of the diversity of
the individual contributors who will be involved in the project -- and
that's the approach we've been following so far since the mentors for
Apache NetBeans have told us that this is the approach to take.

However, I will work more on the initial contributors list, regardless of
the confusion about it. I do think it will be good to have (1) as complete
a list as possible and (2) clear motivation about why people are on that
list, i.e., what they have done to get on that list in the first place.

My aim is, in order to bring this part of the discussion to an end, to take
the strictest approach from all the different approaches apparent in this
discussion and make the list as complete and comprehensive as possible and
provide motivation for each person in the list. Can't do any harm and at
least some of the people in this discussion are explicitly asking for this.
>From my point of view, voting on the proposal should not happen until this
has been done, working on it now, approaching people to ask them to be
added to the list, and will be writing mails to NetBeans mailing lists.

Thanks,

Gj

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Jochen Theodorou
>
> For me the problem is that without plugins you have only the bare
>> plattform and no IDE.
>
>
> No, that's not true at all. The NetBeans plugins are of various kinds.
> There are plugins that are listed in the Plugin Manager by default, these
> are the standard functionalities of NetBeans IDE, i.e., these are all from
> the NetBeans source code and will be part of the Apache donation.
>
>
>> I really only want to hear, that these plugins will be migrated as part
>> of netbeans incubation as well, or what the plans for these are.
>
>
> When we in the NetBeans community talk about "plugins", we only mean those
> made available via plugins.netbeans.org. We have various companies
> interested in hosting these, e.g., Microchip (microchip.com) and Dukehoff
> (dukehoff.com), though there could be more. The problem is going to be
> which of the available companies to select for hosting the plugins as well
> as the application at plugins.netbeans.org for accessing those plugins.
>
> Gj
>
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag@gmx.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 24.09.2016 05:34, Wade Chandler wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> For me the problem is that without plugins you have only the bare
>> plattform and no IDE.If you want to still be able to distribute an IDE with
>> the same plugins as today, you will need to relicense some of the (L)GPled
>> plugins to apache or rewrite them. The "All" version according to
>> https://netbeans.org/downloads/ comes with Java, HTML5/Javascript, PHP,
>> C/C++ and Groovy. And already for those plugins we have a good mix of GPL,
>> LGPL and CDDL. I will become a problem if there will be an netbeans IDE
>> download that mixes these through.
>>
>> I really only want to hear, that these plugins will be migrated as part
>> of netbeans incubation as well, or what the plans for these are.
>>
>> I am sure there will be a solution for the hosting of the plugins.
>>
>> bye Jochen
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message