Greg, many people on this list are probably unaware that your role changed a couple of days ago...
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@apache.org > > wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > >...there hasn't even been a vote on the proposal at this stage. :-) > > > > Correct ;-) > > > > FWIW I've seen an internal draft of Daniel Gruno's infrastructure cost > > analysis so that's progressing nicely, we should have public results > > soon and can then move forward. > > > > One thing that is coming out of this discussion, and the costing is > plugins.nb.o. That seems to be a critical part of the NetBeans ecosystem > and cannot just be "left behind for a few months, and we'll hope to figure > it out before Oracle shuts it down". > > I think it would be a tremendous hardship to the community to enter > incubation, not solve plugins.nb.o, and get their podling retired. Where > would NB go then? Would not be fun. (and by "solve", I mean: some basic > technical approach here at the ASF, and a +1 that the ASF can absorb the > related cost). > > As an IPMC member, I'd be hard-pressed to accept NB without some of idea of > how the community will handle plugins. As Infra, I can help Daniel Gruno > with the costing and getting that +1 from on high. > > (Note: I am sure that NB could be changed over time to use (say) Maven > Central, as mentioned else-thread, but that change is a multi-year rollout; > plugins.nb.o would likely need to exist even past that) > > Cheers, > -g > -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
