netbeans-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julien Enselme <jense...@jujens.eu>
Subject Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2016 08:21:02 GMT
I generally have no big problems with downloads at install time.
However, some users may download the installer to install NetBeans on a
computer without internet access. What then? Will Java will work in a
degraded mode? Will it be possible for the user to manually install the
JARs?

IMHO, this shouldn't be a blocker since I don't think it represents
many users but I still think we must not forget them.

On Mon, 2016-11-07 at 18:31 -0500, Steven Yi wrote:
> +1
> 
> I'm all for the single installer with different module download
> options.
> 
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:19 PM, John McDonnell <mcdonnell.john@gmail.
> com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > On 7 Nov 2016, at 23:13, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wielenga@goo
> > > glemail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > I think the above would actually be a big improvement over the
> > > current
> > > situation where there are multiple downloads.
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > A single download would definitely be simpler and this
> > languages/technology choice could just be an extension of the
> > current plugin mechanism.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > John
> > 
> > > 
> > > On 7 Nov 2016, at 23:13, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wielenga@goo
> > > glemail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Good question and unclear at this point what the solution should
> > > be.
> > > Personally, wouldn't it be simplest to have one single download
> > > (certainly
> > > simpler than the current situation) and then the installer asks
> > > which
> > > languages/technologies you need? If, among others, Java is
> > > selected,
> > > nb-javac (simply two JAR files, by the way, at the end of the
> > > day) would be
> > > downloaded and installed.
> > > 
> > > I think the above would actually be a big improvement over the
> > > current
> > > situation where there are multiple downloads.
> > > 
> > > Gj
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:05 AM, John McDonnell <mcdonnell.john@g
> > > mail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > So how do you see this going forward?
> > > > 
> > > > Currently we have 6 download packages, will we have multiple
> > > > ones when we
> > > > Apache Netbeans is released?, or will we have 4 downloads
> > > > (HTML+Javascript,
> > > > PHP & C/C++, ALL), but the installer always gives the option to
> > > > install
> > > > Java?  As I think I could get behind that, provided we don’t
> > > > forget to
> > > > advertise that Java is a “first class citizen” in the Netbeans
> > > > Ecosystem.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Regards
> > > > 
> > > > John
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 7 Nov 2016, at 22:56, Geertjan Wielenga <
> > > > geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > It would be a smooth process via the installer.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Gj
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 11:43 PM, John Yeary <johnyeary@gmail.
> > > > > com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Hello All,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I agree with John.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > One of the things that I really find annoying about Eclipse
> > > > > > is that you
> > > > > > have all of these options, and as a new user it is a
> > > > > > daunting task to
> > > > pick
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > what you need, or even KNOW what you need.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > If we start asking new users to go download modules to make
> > > > > > it a
> > > > functional
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > IDE, it is a non-starter. The ease of use that NetBeans is
> > > > > > known for
> > > > > > suddenly is no longer.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ____________________________
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > John Yeary
> > > > > > ____________________________
> > > > > > *NetBeans Dream Team*
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > *Founder Greenville Java Users GroupJava Users Groups
> > > > > > Community Leader*
> > > > > > ____________________________
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > <http://javaevangelist.blogspot.com/>  <https://twitter.com
> > > > > > /jyeary>
> > > > > > <http://www.youtube.com/johnyeary>  <http://www.linkedin.co
> > > > > > m/in/jyeary>
> > > > > > <https://plus.google.com/112146428878473069965>
> > > > > > <http://www.facebook.com/jyeary>
> > > > > > <http://feeds.feedburner.com/JavaEvangelistJohnYearysBlog>
> > > > > > <http://netbeans.org/people/84414-jyeary>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious
> > > > > > triumphs, even
> > > > > > though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those
> > > > > > poor spirits
> > > > who
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in
> > > > > > the gray
> > > > twilight
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > that knows not victory nor defeat."
> > > > > > -- Theodore Roosevelt
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:28 PM, John McDonnell <
> > > > mcdonnell.john@gmail.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > HI,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > To me Netbeans has always been first and foremost a Java
> > > > > > > IDE.  This
> > > > move
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > now seems to be making Java an optional extra to Netbeans
> > > > > > > that means I
> > > > > > need
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > to head off somewhere else to get this nb-javac module.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Now I was probably wrong in always thinking that NB is
a
> > > > > > > Java IDE first
> > > > > > > and foremost, as when I go to the Downloads[1] page 3 of
> > > > > > > the 6
> > > > > > > download-able packages don’t contain Java.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Is it worth getting download numbers for each of the 5
> > > > > > > packages and
> > > > > > seeing
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > what % of user base this change would effect currently?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Will this additional download drive Java Developers away
> > > > > > > from Netbeans?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > John
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > [1]: https://netbeans.org/downloads/
> > > > > > > <https://netbeans.org/downloads/>
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > On 7 Nov 2016, at 15:27, Geertjan Wielenga <
> > > > > > > geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Shan Curcuru wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > As a non-regular NetBeans user, I have a clarifying
> > > > > > > > > question from a
> > > > > > > > > *newcomers* perspective that I think will help
on the
> > > > > > > > > "ASF code means
> > > > > > no
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > licensing surprises" side.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 1- Yes. Assuming we resolve other issues that are
going
> > > > > > > > to be coming
> > > > > > up,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > i.e., nb-javac is the current hurdle we're focusing
on,
> > > > > > > > though there
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > smaller ones to follow unrelated to this specific
legal
> > > > > > > > issue that
> > > > > > we're
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > now focused on. [See
> > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> > > > > > > Overview%3A+NetBeans+Structure
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > to predict upcoming legal discussions.]
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 2- Yes.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 3- Yes.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 4- Yes.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Thanks, and I agree, what we're doing is in sync with
> > > > > > > > the "ASF code
> > > > > > means
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > no licensing surprises" side.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Gj
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Shane Curcuru <asf@shan
> > > > > > > > ecurcuru.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > On 2016-11-06 15:01 (-0500), Geertjan Wielenga
> > > > > > > > > <geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun,
> > > > > > > > > Nov 6, 2016 at
> > > > > > 4:59
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > PM, Ate Douma wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Geertjan and others already clarified
and are
> > > > > > > > > > > documenting the
> > > > > > > > > modularity of
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > NetBeans [2], with the core NetBeans
platform
> > > > > > > > > > > being the only
> > > > > > required
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > part.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > All other modules (or clusters) being
optional.
> > > > > > > > > > > So many users might not need the NetBeans
Java
> > > > > > > > > > > cluster.
> > > > > > > > > ...snip...
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > As a non-regular NetBeans user, I have a clarifying
> > > > > > > > > question from a
> > > > > > > > > *newcomers* perspective that I think will help
on the
> > > > > > > > > "ASF code means
> > > > > > no
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > licensing surprises" side.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 1- If I want a great IDE where I can edit my
C,
> > > > > > > > > JavaScript, PHP, HTML
> > > > > > > > > and other non-Java code, and check it in, build
it,
> > > > > > > > > etc. - can I
> > > > > > > > > download NetBeans (plus perhaps some other modules)
> > > > > > > > > where *all* of
> > > > the
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > source code I'm downloading is under a Category
A
> > > > > > > > > license?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 2- If I then want to use NetBeans to edit/build
Java
> > > > > > > > > code, apparently
> > > > > > > > > (as a new user) I need this nb-javac module from
> > > > > > > > > somewhere else which
> > > > > > > > > lets NetBeans the product do "useful stuff" with
> > > > > > > > > Oracle's current
> > > > > > Java,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > correct?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Java developers today would understand that Oracle's
> > > > > > > > > Java platform -
> > > > > > > > > which is widely known and used - has GPL related
code
> > > > > > > > > in it, so they
> > > > > > > > > should not be surprised when they have to go
download
> > > > > > > > > nb-javac from
> > > > > > > > > Oracle, nor should they be surprised when the
sources
> > > > > > > > > for nb-javac
> > > > are
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > also licensed under the GPL.  Does that make
sense?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 3- Java developers who want to use NetBeans +
nb-
> > > > > > > > > javac to build their
> > > > > > > > > own Apache-licensed Java programs for redistribution
> > > > > > > > > would never need
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > worry about the GPL, because it would be clear
as a
> > > > > > > > > Java programmer
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > regular IDE user that the license of the IDE
I'm
> > > > > > > > > using to write/build
> > > > > > my
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > code doesn't affect the license I can use on
the code
> > > > > > > > > I'm writing in
> > > > > > > > > that IDE.  Correct?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > If all three of those are "Yes", then I'm +1
for this
> > > > > > > > > solution and +1
> > > > > > > > > for LEGAL-279.  The separation between Apache
> > > > > > > > > licensed Netbeans as an
> > > > > > > > > IDE and the underlying tooling integration with
the
> > > > > > > > > Java compiler
> > > > > > > > > tooling using GPL seems clear, and given any
> > > > > > > > > experienced Java
> > > > > > developer,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > they would not be surprised to see the licensing
> > > > > > > > > difference.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 4- If I want to extend the editing features in
> > > > > > > > > NetBeans for Java code
> > > > > > > > > (which I think you call "Java cluster"?), can
I use
> > > > > > > > > the Apache
> > > > license
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > for patches and redistribution of the NetBeans
editor
> > > > > > > > > code that
> > > > > > displays
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > the UI, syntax coloring, etc. elements?  I.e.
is the
> > > > > > > > > editor portion
> > > > > > > > > going to be all Apache, and it's just the compiler
> > > > > > > > > (when tooling
> > > > > > > > > integration sends code off to do bytecode) that
is
> > > > > > > > > under GPL?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > - Shane
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > 
-- 
Julien Enselme
http://www.jujens.eu/
Mime
View raw message