Ha.... It was not directed to Hans at all. Just that I thought it could be 
interesting for everyone.

To be clear, I have anything against Hans. He is here for a longer time than me, knows certainly more things than me on OFBiz and his contributions, past and future, are very important. I would have loved that we could get a consensus on the Tweeter account. Because what if we want now to create an apache_ofbiz tweeter account? I suppose we can't since the name already exists. It's as simple as that.

I'M NOT BAD!

Jacques

From: "Scott Gray" <[email protected]>
It just seems rude to me, Hans comes to the list with a discussion, which is a 
good thing, and people start talking about reverts?

Regards
Scott

On 12/03/2010, at 7:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Simply because I read that in the document Bruno "sent" us and I was not aware 
of all details.
So I though maybe some other commitets were not and a summary (on this subject) 
could not hurt.

Jacques

From: "Scott Gray" <[email protected]>
Why would you even bring this up here?  No one is talking about commits and 
definitely no one is talking about reverts.

Regards
Scott

On 12/03/2010, at 2:53 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Anyway a sole -1 is enough for reverting code without explanations
Needs 3 +1  (and more + than -) for a release.
These are Apache rules (inherited from HTTPD project) as it's well explained in the release management document Bruno gave a link)

Jacques

From: "Bilgin Ibryam" <[email protected]>
Scott Gray wrote:
Hi Hans,

I would recommend using the custRequestItem for the story, the implementation can be simple enough by using a service to create the header and item in a single call and a view entity could could them back to you as a single record. Conceptually what you really have is a customer request with a single item.

I don't like the idea of modifying the data model when it is already quite 
capable of meeting your needs.

Regards,
Scott

Agreed with Scott. Having two places for the same information will be confusing/redundant and such a change should not go to ofbiz svn in that case.

Bilgin








Reply via email to