Nothing wrong with a bit of sarcastic humor. I'm sure we can all take it. Adrian, please put me down +1 for the new feature "November 30th."
Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > Adrian, > > in my opinion OFBIZ-1069 could go in the release; OFBIZ-1079 should not. > However I really think that it is very important to maintain a > relaxed, positive and constructive attitude between us especially when > we disagree or have different opinion. > > Jacopo > > > Adrian Crum wrote: >> David E Jones wrote: >>> >>> The primary goal of a release branch is to stabilize current >>> functionality. >>> >>> Generally a very important part of that is to not introduce new >>> functionality that might cause new bugs. That doesn't mean >>> everything one might want or that might be implied in the data model >>> or other parts of the system will work as expected, it just means >>> that everything that IS implemented will function. >>> >>> Some things are difficult to decide on, but remember the first >>> priority is stabilization. >>> >>> -David >> >> In other words, it's okay for the system to function incorrectly, as >> long as it consistently functions incorrectly. >> >> ;) >> >> If you prefer to keep the Workeffort calendar broken, that's fine >> with me. When new users ask why release version 4 has only 29 days in >> November, I can point them to this discussion and let them know that >> November 30th was a new feature that didn't make it into the release. >> >>> >>> >>> Adrian Crum wrote: >>> >>>> Moving this to a new thread. I apologize for the threadjack Scott. >>>> >>>> I'm puzzled. A Workeffort screen displays a calendar incorrectly >>>> and I submit a patch that fixes it. How is that a new feature? >>>> >>>> It sounds to me like bug fixes are okay as long as they don't >>>> introduce new code. What if fixing a bug requires new code? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15/06/07, Tim Ruppert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Then I guess it depends on whether or not the rest of the fix is >>>> indeed >>>> > fixing a bug or new features :) >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Tim >>>> > -- >>>> > Tim Ruppert >>>> > HotWax Media >>>> > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>>> > >>>> > o:801.649.6594 >>>> > f:801.649.6595 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Jun 14, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >>>> > >>>> > From my perspective, having two 4ths and only 29 days in >>>> November is a >>>> > bug. >>>> > >>>> > David E Jones wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I don't know... that's a fairly big change and in a very real way >>>> > supporting DST changes is a new feature... >>>> > That's my opinion anyway. Doesn't this also depend on a fair >>>> amount of >>>> > other new functionality? >>>> > -David >>>> > Adrian Crum wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Scott, >>>> > >>>> > This isn't already committed, but it needs to go into both - >>>> > >>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1069 >>>> > >>>> > -Adrian >>>> > >>>> > Scott Gray wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hi All, >>>> > >>>> > I'll be reviewing the last fortnight's trunk commits for merging >>>> back to >>>> > the >>>> > release branch tonight, so if anyone knows of any trunk commits >>>> that >>>> > should >>>> > be merged it would be great if you could post them here. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks >>>> > Scott >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> -- Vince Clark Global Era The freedom of open source. (303) 493-6723 (303) 455-2409 fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.globalera.com
