netbeans-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Optional modules with GPL dependencies (was: What to include/exclude in code donation to Apache)
Date Mon, 07 Nov 2016 22:56:38 GMT
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.com/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@shanecurcuru.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
> > >>
> >
> >
>

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