You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> on 2014/05/30 14:28:19 UTC
specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Hi,
For the R13.07 demo I think we should set an external property from trunk into specialpurpose for some (those which make sense) components.
I created this svn external property:
specialpurpose/assetmaint/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/assetmaint
specialpurpose/birt/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/birt
specialpurpose/cmssite/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/cmssite
specialpurpose/ebay/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebay
specialpurpose/ebaystore/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebaystore
specialpurpose/example/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/example
specialpurpose/exampleext/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/exampleext
specialpurpose/googlecheckout/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/googlecheckout
specialpurpose/lucene/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/lucene
specialpurpose/myportal/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal
specialpurpose/projectmgr/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/projectmgr
specialpurpose/scrum/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/scrum
specialpurpose/webpos/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/webpos
What do you think?
Jacques
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
I was referring to "real" customers that are paying OFBiz contributors
like you, real money to get them set up using OFBiz.
On 23/10/2014 12:30 PM, Pierre @GMail wrote:
> Is it a good thing to not regard the ofbiz user as a customer?
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 23 okt. 2014, at 17:33, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>
>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>>
>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>
>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>
>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with demo data.
>>>
>>>
>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>
>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>> We have no customers, only users
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>
>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacopo
>>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by "Pierre @GMail" <pi...@gmail.com>.
Is it a good thing to not regard the ofbiz user as a customer?
Regards,
Pierre
Sent from my iPhone
> On 23 okt. 2014, at 17:33, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
>
> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>
>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>
>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>
> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>
>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>
> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>
>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>
>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>
> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>
>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with demo data.
>>
>>
>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>
> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>
>>
>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>
> We have no customers, only users
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>
>>>
>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>
>>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 23/10/2014 3:32 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Le 23/10/2014 19:52, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> I don't think that I was implying that in the point that I was trying
>> to make.
>>
>> It is my theory that the way that this project deals with the
>> releases and the trunk is directly related to the fact that most of
>> the people involved have customers for whom they fork the OFBiz
>> system and deliver a forked version to which they apply patches and
>> improvements when they get applied to the trunk rather than using the
>> official release as a base for their deliverables.
>
> Actually I believe more and more OFBiz service providers rely on one
> of the release branches, less and less the trunk HEAD.
One would think that this would generate a lot of support for backporting.
>
> But yes, there are also maybe few OFBiz service providers who start
> with a static packaged releases for a client custom project.
> Thought it's far easier to svn update a release branch where bug fixes
> are "routinely" backported by committers than to muck around with
> patches to apply on a static packaged releases or anything else static
> (static meaning here with no connection with the OFBiz svn repo).
>
> This is actually even true for anybody working from OFBiz.
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> This may appear to work but I think that it hurts the project and
>> probably has a negative effect on the overall profitability of the
>> OFBiz market served by these companies.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>
>> On 23/10/2014 12:33 PM, Pierre @GMail wrote:
>>> The others participating in this project ( with and without
>>> customers are of no importance?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On 23 okt. 2014, at 18:04, Ron Wheeler
>>>> <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux
>>>>>>>> <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or
>>>>>>>>> checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to
>>>>>>>>> enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand
>>>>>>>> the meaning of it.
>>>>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be
>>>>>>> applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be
>>>>>>> disabled in trunk.
>>>>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all
>>>>>>> specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available
>>>>>>> in R13.07 demo)
>>>>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>>>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos
>>>>> because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the
>>>>> R13.07 branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>>>>
>>>>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between
>>>>>> releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>>>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in
>>>>> R13.07 demo?
>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release
>>>>>> strategies wherein the current release is the recommended
>>>>>> download and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in
>>>>>> terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is
>>>>>> usually called something that includes"nightly build" and
>>>>>> "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning
>>>>>> about using it at your own risk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and
>>>>>> have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and
>>>>>> marketing pages.
>>>>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged
>>>>> releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception,
>>>>> because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose
>>>>> components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>>>>
>>>>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set
>>>>>> up since it should not require any technical skills to keep
>>>>>> working and fed with demo data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build,
>>>>>> they should be free to set up as many combinations of
>>>>>> configurations as they require and can support to be sure that
>>>>>> the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or
>>>>>> even be called a "demo".
>>>>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's
>>>>> only a developers thing.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and
>>>>>> the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new
>>>>>> customers.
>>>>> We have no customers, only users
>>>> The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and
>>>>>> what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>>>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where
>>>>>> it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual
>>>>>> release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ron Wheeler
>>>> President
>>>> Artifact Software Inc
>>>> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 23/10/2014 19:52, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
> I don't think that I was implying that in the point that I was trying to make.
>
> It is my theory that the way that this project deals with the releases and the trunk is directly related to the fact that most of the people
> involved have customers for whom they fork the OFBiz system and deliver a forked version to which they apply patches and improvements when they get
> applied to the trunk rather than using the official release as a base for their deliverables.
Actually I believe more and more OFBiz service providers rely on one of the release branches, less and less the trunk HEAD.
But yes, there are also maybe few OFBiz service providers who start with a static packaged releases for a client custom project.
Thought it's far easier to svn update a release branch where bug fixes are "routinely" backported by committers than to muck around with patches to
apply on a static packaged releases or anything else static (static meaning here with no connection with the OFBiz svn repo).
This is actually even true for anybody working from OFBiz.
Jacques
>
> This may appear to work but I think that it hurts the project and probably has a negative effect on the overall profitability of the OFBiz market
> served by these companies.
>
> Ron
>
>
> On 23/10/2014 12:33 PM, Pierre @GMail wrote:
>> The others participating in this project ( with and without customers are of no importance?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 23 okt. 2014, at 18:04, Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a
>>>>>>>> component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but
>>>> ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>>>
>>>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>>>>
>>>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries
>>>>> whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that
>>>>> includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>>>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought
>>>> it was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>>>
>>>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with
>>>>> demo data.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they
>>>>> require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>>>
>>>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>>> We have no customers, only users
>>> The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ron Wheeler
>>> President
>>> Artifact Software Inc
>>> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>>
>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
I don't think that I was implying that in the point that I was trying to
make.
It is my theory that the way that this project deals with the releases
and the trunk is directly related to the fact that most of the people
involved have customers for whom they fork the OFBiz system and deliver
a forked version to which they apply patches and improvements when they
get applied to the trunk rather than using the official release as a
base for their deliverables.
This may appear to work but I think that it hurts the project and
probably has a negative effect on the overall profitability of the OFBiz
market served by these companies.
Ron
On 23/10/2014 12:33 PM, Pierre @GMail wrote:
> The others participating in this project ( with and without customers are of no importance?
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 23 okt. 2014, at 18:04, Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>>
>>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>>>
>>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>>
>>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>>
>>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with demo data.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>>
>>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>> We have no customers, only users
>> The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>>
>>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacopo
>>
>> --
>> Ron Wheeler
>> President
>> Artifact Software Inc
>> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by "Pierre @GMail" <pi...@gmail.com>.
The others participating in this project ( with and without customers are of no importance?
Regards,
Pierre
Sent from my iPhone
> On 23 okt. 2014, at 18:04, Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
>
>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>>
>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>>
>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>
>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>
>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>
>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>>
>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>
>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>>
>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>
>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with demo data.
>>>
>>>
>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>
>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>
>>>
>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>
>> We have no customers, only users
>
> The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
>
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacopo
>
>
> --
> Ron Wheeler
> President
> Artifact Software Inc
> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> skype: ronaldmwheeler
> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 23/10/2014 1:00 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Le 23/10/2014 18:04, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux
>>>>>> <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or
>>>>>>> checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to
>>>>>>> enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand
>>>>>> the meaning of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be
>>>>> applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be
>>>>> disabled in trunk.
>>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all
>>>>> specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in
>>>>> R13.07 demo)
>>>>
>>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>>
>>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos
>>> because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07
>>> branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>>
>>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases
>>>> and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>>
>>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07
>>> demo?
>>>
>>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release
>>>> strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download
>>>> and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of
>>>> testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called
>>>> something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name
>>>> and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own
>>>> risk.
>>>>
>>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have
>>>> a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and
>>>> marketing pages.
>>>
>>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged
>>> releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception,
>>> because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose
>>> components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>>
>>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up
>>>> since it should not require any technical skills to keep working
>>>> and fed with demo data.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they
>>>> should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as
>>>> they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works
>>>> but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>>
>>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's
>>> only a developers thing.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and
>>>> the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>>
>>> We have no customers, only users
>>
>> The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
>
> Please don't mix things. With "We" above I spoke on behalf of the
> OFBiz dev team (ie the committers).
> To state it clearly the <<Apache OFBiz project has no customers but
> only users>>
> You owe something to a customer, it's your client.
> The Apache OFBiz project does not owe anything to its users. You can
> speak around that, but it's a fact, only volunteers work is donated to
> this project. Nobody is paid directly by the ASF or the OFBiz project.
>
> I thought this was quite obvious for everyone (including Pierre which
> is questioning in 2 other emails)
>
> Now as you said indeed PMC members have customers. But that's another
> totally unrelated thing to me.
Sorry that I was not clear when I talked about "team" having customers.
I was referring to those on the PMC that make their living selling
forked versions of OFBiz to others.
It may not be true for all committers.
Ron
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what
>>>> the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it
>>>> would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 23/10/2014 18:04, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a
>>>>>> component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>>
>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>>
>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>
>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but
>> ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>
>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>
>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>>
>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries
>>> whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that
>>> includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>
>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>>
>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it
>> was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>
>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with
>>> demo data.
>>>
>>>
>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they
>>> require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>
>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>
>>>
>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>
>> We have no customers, only users
>
> The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
Please don't mix things. With "We" above I spoke on behalf of the OFBiz dev team (ie the committers).
To state it clearly the <<Apache OFBiz project has no customers but only users>>
You owe something to a customer, it's your client.
The Apache OFBiz project does not owe anything to its users. You can speak around that, but it's a fact, only volunteers work is donated to this
project. Nobody is paid directly by the ASF or the OFBiz project.
I thought this was quite obvious for everyone (including Pierre which is questioning in 2 other emails)
Now as you said indeed PMC members have customers. But that's another totally unrelated thing to me.
Jacques
>
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux
>>>> <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or
>>>>> checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to
>>>>> enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the
>>>> meaning of it.
>>>
>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be
>>> applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be
>>> disabled in trunk.
>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all
>>> specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in
>>> R13.07 demo)
>>
>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>
> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because
> they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch
> (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>
>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases
>> and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>
> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07
> demo?
>
>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release
>> strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download
>> and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of
>> testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called
>> something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and
>> comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>
>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a
>> fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing
>> pages.
>
> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged
> releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because
> I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose components
> available. This is what Jacopo contests
>
>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up
>> since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and
>> fed with demo data.
>>
>>
>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they
>> should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as
>> they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works
>> but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>
> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only
> a developers thing.
>
>>
>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the
>> team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>
> We have no customers, only users
The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring.
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what
>> the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it
>> would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>
>>>
>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 24/10/2014 16:14, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
> On 24/10/2014 3:58 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>> Le 24/10/2014 00:02, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a
>>>>>>>> component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>>>>
>>>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>>>
>>>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but
>>>> ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>>>
>>>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>>>
>>>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>>>
>>> If they are not in the 13.07.01 release it creates a bit of a mismatch between the demo and what you actually get.
>>> Otherwise I would have no problem.
>>
>> It's also Jacopo's opinion, I don't know if it's for the same reason.
>> My proposed alternative is to keep only the ones which will be enabled in the trunk and explain somewhere (on the site main page?) why we do that
>> and how to do the same using svn external or direct check out from trunk.
>> The idea is it's a bit didactic on how to use the specialpurpose components in future releases. Except if we change our POV and keep the enabled
>> ones in releases in future, which could be even simpler...
>>
>
> Is there an architectural overview describing the relationship between the core functionality and the "supported" components?
The best we have is this https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> Is there a difference between "available" and "enabled" that would be clear to a new user?
Available in releases would be the components enabled in trunk.
> I don't understand the technical details but I gather that there is a potential for conflict between the components.
> Has there been any guidelines about how to describe the conflict issue to a system administrator so that modules are installed in the "right"
> sequence to end up with a working system?
See above, this might need update
> Has there been any discussion about how developers should construct components so that their potential for interference is reduced and is done in a
> consistent way.
There are many in MLs history. By and large, there can be dependencies between components of the same levels. You can't build an ERP, where things are
integrated, else.
Then, the bottom level being framework, then applications, then specialpurpose and finally hot-deploy, there should not be dependencies from a lower
level component to a higher level one.
> Are there hooks that allow administrators to configure sets of components to work the way that they should or to allow developers of components to
> write components that interact with the core functionality in a safe way?
One of the most important and interesting thing in OFBiz is the possibility for a functional component (ie the framework level does not count here) to
override things done at a lower level. This is how hot-deploy works. You can override things from applications level in hot-deploy. I say things
because it concerns most artefacts.
> For example, a way to allow a system administrator to chose between 2 data entry screens depending on what data needs to be collected( if you enable
> component B, then you need to use order-entry screen "B" rather than the core screen and if you do, the core order processing will still work where
> it does not require or track the extra data that screen "B" collects .
This is certainly doable but would need some code glue, ie it's not available OOTB.
Also I'm not sure that the component concept is well adapated here, since you speak about screen. The component is not an artefact in the sense of
OFBiz, rather a container.
https://demo-trunk-ofbiz.apache.org/webtools/control/ViewComponents
https://demo-trunk-ofbiz.apache.org/webtools/control/ArtifactInfo (be patient this takes much resources)
Jacques
>
>
> Ron
>
>> I guess at some point the disabled specialpurpose components in trunk will end in Attic.
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>> Ron
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries
>>>>> whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that
>>>>> includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>>>>
>>>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought
>>>> it was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>>>
>>>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with
>>>>> demo data.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they
>>>>> require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>>>
>>>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>>>
>>>> We have no customers, only users
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 24/10/2014 3:58 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> Le 24/10/2014 00:02, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux
>>>>>> <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or
>>>>>>> checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to
>>>>>>> enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand
>>>>>> the meaning of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be
>>>>> applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be
>>>>> disabled in trunk.
>>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all
>>>>> specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in
>>>>> R13.07 demo)
>>>>
>>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>>
>>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos
>>> because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07
>>> branch (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>>
>>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases
>>>> and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>>
>>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07
>>> demo?
>>
>> If they are not in the 13.07.01 release it creates a bit of a
>> mismatch between the demo and what you actually get.
>> Otherwise I would have no problem.
>
> It's also Jacopo's opinion, I don't know if it's for the same reason.
> My proposed alternative is to keep only the ones which will be enabled
> in the trunk and explain somewhere (on the site main page?) why we do
> that and how to do the same using svn external or direct check out
> from trunk.
> The idea is it's a bit didactic on how to use the specialpurpose
> components in future releases. Except if we change our POV and keep
> the enabled ones in releases in future, which could be even simpler...
>
Is there an architectural overview describing the relationship between
the core functionality and the "supported" components?
Is there a difference between "available" and "enabled" that would be
clear to a new user?
I don't understand the technical details but I gather that there is a
potential for conflict between the components.
Has there been any guidelines about how to describe the conflict issue
to a system administrator so that modules are installed in the "right"
sequence to end up with a working system?
Has there been any discussion about how developers should construct
components so that their potential for interference is reduced and is
done in a consistent way.
Are there hooks that allow administrators to configure sets of
components to work the way that they should or to allow developers of
components to write components that interact with the core functionality
in a safe way? For example, a way to allow a system administrator to
chose between 2 data entry screens depending on what data needs to be
collected( if you enable component B, then you need to use order-entry
screen "B" rather than the core screen and if you do, the core order
processing will still work where it does not require or track the extra
data that screen "B" collects .
Ron
> I guess at some point the disabled specialpurpose components in trunk
> will end in Attic.
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>>
>>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release
>>>> strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download
>>>> and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of
>>>> testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called
>>>> something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name
>>>> and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own
>>>> risk.
>>>>
>>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have
>>>> a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and
>>>> marketing pages.
>>>
>>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged
>>> releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception,
>>> because I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose
>>> components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>>
>>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up
>>>> since it should not require any technical skills to keep working
>>>> and fed with demo data.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they
>>>> should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as
>>>> they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works
>>>> but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>>
>>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's
>>> only a developers thing.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and
>>>> the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>>
>>> We have no customers, only users
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what
>>>> the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it
>>>> would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 24/10/2014 6:52 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 9:58 AM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess at some point the disabled specialpurpose components in trunk will end in Attic.
> Not necessarily: a disabled component could be a specialized version (e.g. for a specific industry or for a specific payment processor) of some of the application components and could be actively maintained; in this case it would make sense to disable it by default (because by default OFBiz should be as generic as possible) but still keep it in the trunk (and possibly in some releases, e.g. ofbiz-specialpurpose-13.07.03.zip).
>
> Jacopo
>
>
This is another area where sub-projects would help.
The software would be maintained in its own repo and would be supported
by an identifiable team that actually cared about it and would be
responsible for building the community to support that function.
There would be someone (or some people) able to say if it was going to
be ported to the latest release and bugs backported to previous releases.
If that sub-project died, it would be clear and everyone would know that
it was not going to be available as part of future OFBiz releases unless
some group took charge of the sub-project and did the work.
This structure would help everyone and increase the transparency around
the management of components.
Ron
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On Oct 24, 2014, at 9:58 AM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> I guess at some point the disabled specialpurpose components in trunk will end in Attic.
Not necessarily: a disabled component could be a specialized version (e.g. for a specific industry or for a specific payment processor) of some of the application components and could be actively maintained; in this case it would make sense to disable it by default (because by default OFBiz should be as generic as possible) but still keep it in the trunk (and possibly in some releases, e.g. ofbiz-specialpurpose-13.07.03.zip).
Jacopo
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 24/10/2014 00:02, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a
>>>>>> component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>>>
>>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>>>
>>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>>
>> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but
>> ecommerce) only in trunk.
>>
>>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>>
>> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
>
> If they are not in the 13.07.01 release it creates a bit of a mismatch between the demo and what you actually get.
> Otherwise I would have no problem.
It's also Jacopo's opinion, I don't know if it's for the same reason.
My proposed alternative is to keep only the ones which will be enabled in the trunk and explain somewhere (on the site main page?) why we do that and
how to do the same using svn external or direct check out from trunk.
The idea is it's a bit didactic on how to use the specialpurpose components in future releases. Except if we change our POV and keep the enabled ones
in releases in future, which could be even simpler...
I guess at some point the disabled specialpurpose components in trunk will end in Attic.
Jacques
>
> Ron
>
>>
>>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries
>>> whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that
>>> includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>>
>>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
>>
>> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it
>> was better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
>>
>>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with
>>> demo data.
>>>
>>>
>>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they
>>> require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>>
>> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>>
>>>
>>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>>
>> We have no customers, only users
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux
>>>> <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or
>>>>> checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to
>>>>> enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the
>>>> meaning of it.
>>>
>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be
>>> applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be
>>> disabled in trunk.
>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all
>>> specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in
>>> R13.07 demo)
>>
>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
>
> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because
> they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch
> (but ecommerce) only in trunk.
>
>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases
>> and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
>
> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07
> demo?
If they are not in the 13.07.01 release it creates a bit of a mismatch
between the demo and what you actually get.
Otherwise I would have no problem.
Ron
>
>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release
>> strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download
>> and carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of
>> testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called
>> something that includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and
>> comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>>
>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a
>> fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing
>> pages.
>
> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged
> releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because
> I thought it was better to have the specialpurpose components
> available. This is what Jacopo contests
>
>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up
>> since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and
>> fed with demo data.
>>
>>
>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they
>> should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as
>> they require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works
>> but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
>
> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only
> a developers thing.
>
>>
>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the
>> team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
>
> We have no customers, only users
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what
>> the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it
>> would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>>
>>>
>>> I hope it's more clear
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component
>>>> in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
>>
>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
>
> If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but
ecommerce) only in trunk.
> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo?
> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries
> whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that
> includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
>
> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it was
better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo contests
> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with
> demo data.
>
>
> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they require
> and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a developers thing.
>
> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
We have no customers, only users
Jacques
>
> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>
>>
>> I hope it's more clear
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux
>> <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked
>>> out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a
>>> component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the
>> meaning of it.
>
> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied
> in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in
> trunk.
> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all
> specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in
> R13.07 demo)
If they are in the demo they should be in the release.
As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and
the trunk and demos in OFBiz.
It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release
strategies wherein the current release is the recommended download and
carries whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing
and rapidity of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that
includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no
warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk.
Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a
fixed functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages.
It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since
it should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with
demo data.
If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they
should be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they
require and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this
should not be the public demo or even be called a "demo".
Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the
team stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers.
Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the
main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead.
Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it
would be possible to use the official Release as the actual release?
>
> I hope it's more clear
>
> Jacques
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk.
In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo)
I hope it's more clear
Jacques
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacopo
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in demos, moreover demos are shared.
Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the meaning of it.
Thanks,
Jacopo
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 30/09/2014 08:47, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
> Also, since (by design) the specialpurpose components there could be incompatible components (i.e. specialpurpose/a causes side effects in specialpurpose/b), or alternative components (i.e. specialpurpose/a is a different implementation of the same features of specialpurpose/b) or components that override some of the screens published by the applications (i.e. specialpurpose/a replaces applications/a screen with a custom version), we should, by default, disable (most of) them and provide a README file with the information on how to enable them selectively.
I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component in
demos, moreover demos are shared.
So before this effort is accomplished it's better to run the R13.07 demo completed with the specialpurpose components also present in trunk demo.
Then we would put as external in R13.07 (and sequel releases) only the not (by default) disabled components in trunk, a bit convoluted though :/
A moment I even thought about Attic for some unmaintained components (ebaystore?, googlebase?, googlecheckout?, jetty?, webpos?, ...), WHO cares?
BTW I just noticed that we missed to adapt the ecommerce component in R13.07 for the missing ebaystore and googlecheckout components.
I guess it's only about checking in trunk HEAD code for these components presence and hidding their buttons when they would otherwise show. This
should be backported in R13.07 of course.
Jacques
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Sep 30, 2014, at 8:38 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
>
>> in my opinion it is better to run the demo on the exact copy of the release branch.
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> On May 30, 2014, at 2:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> For the R13.07 demo I think we should set an external property from trunk into specialpurpose for some (those which make sense) components.
>>>
>>> I created this svn external property:
>>>
>>> specialpurpose/assetmaint/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/assetmaint
>>> specialpurpose/birt/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/birt
>>> specialpurpose/cmssite/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/cmssite
>>> specialpurpose/ebay/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebay
>>> specialpurpose/ebaystore/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebaystore
>>> specialpurpose/example/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/example
>>> specialpurpose/exampleext/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/exampleext
>>> specialpurpose/googlecheckout/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/googlecheckout
>>> specialpurpose/lucene/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/lucene
>>> specialpurpose/myportal/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal
>>> specialpurpose/projectmgr/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/projectmgr
>>> specialpurpose/scrum/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/scrum
>>> specialpurpose/webpos/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/webpos
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Also, since (by design) the specialpurpose components there could be incompatible components (i.e. specialpurpose/a causes side effects in specialpurpose/b), or alternative components (i.e. specialpurpose/a is a different implementation of the same features of specialpurpose/b) or components that override some of the screens published by the applications (i.e. specialpurpose/a replaces applications/a screen with a custom version), we should, by default, disable (most of) them and provide a README file with the information on how to enable them selectively.
Jacopo
On Sep 30, 2014, at 8:38 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
> in my opinion it is better to run the demo on the exact copy of the release branch.
>
> Jacopo
>
> On May 30, 2014, at 2:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For the R13.07 demo I think we should set an external property from trunk into specialpurpose for some (those which make sense) components.
>>
>> I created this svn external property:
>>
>> specialpurpose/assetmaint/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/assetmaint
>> specialpurpose/birt/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/birt
>> specialpurpose/cmssite/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/cmssite
>> specialpurpose/ebay/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebay
>> specialpurpose/ebaystore/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebaystore
>> specialpurpose/example/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/example
>> specialpurpose/exampleext/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/exampleext
>> specialpurpose/googlecheckout/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/googlecheckout
>> specialpurpose/lucene/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/lucene
>> specialpurpose/myportal/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal
>> specialpurpose/projectmgr/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/projectmgr
>> specialpurpose/scrum/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/scrum
>> specialpurpose/webpos/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/webpos
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>
Re: specialpurpose in R13.07 demo
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
in my opinion it is better to run the demo on the exact copy of the release branch.
Jacopo
On May 30, 2014, at 2:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For the R13.07 demo I think we should set an external property from trunk into specialpurpose for some (those which make sense) components.
>
> I created this svn external property:
>
> specialpurpose/assetmaint/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/assetmaint
> specialpurpose/birt/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/birt
> specialpurpose/cmssite/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/cmssite
> specialpurpose/ebay/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebay
> specialpurpose/ebaystore/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/ebaystore
> specialpurpose/example/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/example
> specialpurpose/exampleext/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/exampleext
> specialpurpose/googlecheckout/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/googlecheckout
> specialpurpose/lucene/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/lucene
> specialpurpose/myportal/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal
> specialpurpose/projectmgr/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/projectmgr
> specialpurpose/scrum/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/scrum
> specialpurpose/webpos/ https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/webpos
>
> What do you think?
>
> Jacques
>