I'm not familiar with that bug, but I am of the opinion that branch 22.01 is abandoned, therefore there is no target branch to backport a bug to.
We also are not accepting bug fixes into the 18 branch - Perhaps this is a decision we should reconsidered since it means we have no path to migrate users towards a fix in case of a serious bug. But once again, I am mindful that we have limited time to do additional work - perhaps this is a subject for a different thread. On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 16:46, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > Also please consider these comments: https://s.apache.org/fcpi3 > > Le 28/07/2023 à 17:32, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > > Hi Daniel, > > > > Ho many time do you think we need? > > > > Maybe a month is indeed short. Though actually the changes are pretty > simple and we should not cross much issues > > > > Le 28/07/2023 à 17:17, Daniel Watford a écrit : > >> Hi Jacques, > >> > >> Apologies if I've misunderstood your meaning, but I don't think we > should > >> rush to create a 23.xx branch. > >> > >> Following such a large refactor, we are likely to find issues in our > use of > >> groovy scripts over the coming weeks. If we go ahead and create a new > 23.xx > >> branch from trunk too soon we will have to fix those groovy script > issues > >> in trunk and the new branch - increasing the amount of work needed. > >> > >> I agree that we want to get a 23.xx branch in place once we are happy > that > >> the groovy script refactor work has completed and had a chance to have a > >> few fixes applied. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Dan. > >> > >> On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 at 16:08, Jacques Le Roux < > jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Le 03/05/2023 à 09:45, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : > >>>> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:17 AM Daniel Watford <d...@foomoo.co.uk> > wrote: > >>>> [...] > >>>>> I'll ask one more question (and then run for cover!): Rather than > carry > >>> out > >>>>> this work twice. What if we abandon the 22.01 release and instead > make > >>> a > >>>>> new release branch (23.xx) soon after moving the Groovy sources? > >>>>> > >>>> Yes, we could do this. Abandon 22.01, perform the refactoring, create > >>>> a new release branch, stabilize (we could consider a shorter > >>>> stabilization period). > >>>> We could also extend our support (mostly for security vulnerability > >>>> fixes) to 18.12, at least until 1 or 2 releases have been published > >>>> out of the new branch. > >>>> > >>>> Jacopo > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> In relation with [OFBIZ-12813] Refactor groovy folder structure and add > >>> package declaration > >>> > >>> As soon as a groovy file is modified, and especially moved, in trunk > >>> (framework is done, plugins is waiting), it will be more hand work to > >>> backport. > >>> So I think we should indeed quickly think about creating a 23.xx > (23.09?) > >>> release branch. Else if will be soon a nightmare to backport fixes. > >>> > >>> Jacques > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- Daniel Watford
