Re: [VOTE] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.

[Swapnil M Mane]

-1

Best regards,
Swapnil M Mane,
ofbiz.apache.org



On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:57 PM Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> R16 is now an old distribution and has almost reached its end of support.
> We can soon expect a last release but we need to think about the next to be
> released package
>
> Some would prefer to release R17 before releasing R18, some would prefer
> to bypass R17 release and directly publish R18 instead.
>
> Vote:
> [ +1] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.
> [ -1]  Release R17 before releasing R18
>
> We had already 3 months to discuss without reaching a consensus, so this
> vote will be only open for a week.
>
> Note that it's not a formal vote to release R17 or R18, as that is another
> process documented at
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz
>
> Thank you for your attention
>
> Jacques
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.

[Aditya Sharma]

-1

Thanks and Regards,
Aditya Sharma

On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 4:02 PM James Yong  wrote:

> +1
>
> Regards,
> James
>
> On 2020/01/24 10:27:15, Jacques Le Roux 
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > R16 is now an old distribution and has almost reached its end of
> support. We can soon expect a last release but we need to think about the
> next to be
> > released package
> >
> > Some would prefer to release R17 before releasing R18, some would prefer
> to bypass R17 release and directly publish R18 instead.
> >
> > Vote:
> > [ +1] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.
> > [ -1]  Release R17 before releasing R18
> >
> > We had already 3 months to discuss without reaching a consensus, so this
> vote will be only open for a week.
> >
> > Note that it's not a formal vote to release R17 or R18, as that is
> another process documented at
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz
> >
> > Thank you for your attention
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.

[James Yong]

+1

Regards,
James

On 2020/01/24 10:27:15, Jacques Le Roux  wrote: 
> Hi,
> 
> R16 is now an old distribution and has almost reached its end of support. We 
> can soon expect a last release but we need to think about the next to be 
> released package
> 
> Some would prefer to release R17 before releasing R18, some would prefer to 
> bypass R17 release and directly publish R18 instead.
> 
> Vote:
> [ +1] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.
> [ -1]  Release R17 before releasing R18
> 
> We had already 3 months to discuss without reaching a consensus, so this vote 
> will be only open for a week.
> 
> Note that it's not a formal vote to release R17 or R18, as that is another 
> process documented at
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz
> 
> Thank you for your attention
> 
> Jacques
> 
> 

Re: [VOTE] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.

[Suraj Khurana]

-1


Best Regards,

Suraj Khurana
SENIOR TECHNICAL CONSULTANT



On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 1:34 PM Deepak Dixit  wrote:

> -1
>
> Kind Regards,
> Deepak Dixit
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 10:24 PM Martin Becker 
> wrote:
>
> > -1
> >
> > Martin Becker
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2020/01/24 10:27:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > > Hi,>
> > >
> > > R16 is now an old distribution and has almost reached its end of
> > support. We can soon expect a last release but we need to think about the
> > next to be >
> > > released package>
> > >
> > > Some would prefer to release R17 before releasing R18, some would
> prefer
> > to bypass R17 release and directly publish R18 instead.>
> > >
> > > Vote:>
> > > [ +1] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.>
> > > [ -1]  Release R17 before releasing R18>
> > >
> > > We had already 3 months to discuss without reaching a consensus, so
> this
> > vote will be only open for a week.>
> > >
> > > Note that it's not a formal vote to release R17 or R18, as that is
> > another process documented at>
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Thank you for your attention>
> > >
> > > Jacques>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: Welcome to Olivier Heintz as new committer!

[Deepak Dixit]

Many Many congratulations Olivier Heintz !!

Thanks & Regards
--
Deepak Dixit
ofbiz.apache.org


On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 4:37 PM Michael Brohl 
wrote:

> Congratulations and welcome on board, Olivier!
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 16.01.20 um 15:23 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
> > The OFBiz PMC has invited Olivier Heintz to become a new committer and
> > we are happy to announce that he has accepted this role.
> >
> > Some of the reasons for inviting Olivier Heintz include:
> >
> > - He is invested in the OFBiz project and has been a member for many
> years
> > - He is taking an initiative towards improving the UI part of the system
> > - He has functional experience in various areas of the framework
> > - He enjoys working with the community and collaborating with others
> >
> > Please join me in welcoming and congratulating Olivier!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Taher Alkhateeb
>
>

Re: [ofbiz-framework] branch trunk updated: Fixed: Potensial bug under CommunicationEventServices#updateCommEventAfterEmail for CommunicationEvent.subject field (OFBIZ-10879)

[Deepak Dixit]

I think this is not the right fix for reported problems.
As we are updating so we don't need to pass the to,cc and bcc. And
redirectTo will be used in dev mode only.
We can fix the subject length only.

IMO we should revert this.

Kind Regards,
Deepak Dixit
DIRECTOR OF PRODUCT ENGINEERING
mobile: +91 9826754548
email: deepak.di...@hotwax.co
*www.hotwax.co *


On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 3:55 PM  wrote:

> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>
> pawan pushed a commit to branch trunk
> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz-framework.git
>
>
> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/trunk by this push:
>  new 832076c  Fixed: Potensial bug under
> CommunicationEventServices#updateCommEventAfterEmail for
> CommunicationEvent.subject field (OFBIZ-10879)
> 832076c is described below
>
> commit 832076ce91dbca182ffab38d27ea72ca5e2cb0be
> Author: Pawan Verma 
> AuthorDate: Sat Jan 25 15:54:37 2020 +0530
>
> Fixed: Potensial bug under
> CommunicationEventServices#updateCommEventAfterEmail for
> CommunicationEvent.subject field
> (OFBIZ-10879)
>
> CommunicationEventServices#updateCommEventAfterEmail could generate
> wrong result. If general.properties value 'mail.notifications.redirectTo'
> is used, it is possible that the subject string has more than 255 character.
>
> Thanks, Ulrich Heidfeld for your contribution.
> ---
>  .../communication/CommunicationEventServices.java  | 23
> ++
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git
> a/applications/party/src/main/java/org/apache/ofbiz/party/communication/CommunicationEventServices.java
> b/applications/party/src/main/java/org/apache/ofbiz/party/communication/CommunicationEventServices.java
> index 85f1134..dfb6012 100644
> ---
> a/applications/party/src/main/java/org/apache/ofbiz/party/communication/CommunicationEventServices.java
> +++
> b/applications/party/src/main/java/org/apache/ofbiz/party/communication/CommunicationEventServices.java
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ import javax.mail.internet.InternetAddress;
>  import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest;
>  import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletResponse;
>
> +import org.apache.commons.lang.StringUtils;
>  import org.apache.ofbiz.base.location.FlexibleLocation;
>  import org.apache.ofbiz.base.util.Debug;
>  import org.apache.ofbiz.base.util.GeneralException;
> @@ -823,6 +824,7 @@ public class CommunicationEventServices {
>   */
>  public static Map
> updateCommEventAfterEmail(DispatchContext dctx, Map Object> context) {
>  LocalDispatcher dispatcher = dctx.getDispatcher();
> +Delegator delegator = dctx.getDelegator();
>
>  GenericValue userLogin = (GenericValue) context.get("userLogin");
>  String communicationEventId = (String)
> context.get("communicationEventId");
> @@ -838,6 +840,27 @@ public class CommunicationEventServices {
>  commEventMap.put("userLogin", userLogin);
>  commEventMap.put("content", wrapper.getMessageBody());
>
> +String subject = wrapper.getSubject();
> +String redirectAddress =
> EntityUtilProperties.getPropertyValue("general",
> +"mail.notifications.redirectTo", delegator);
> +if (UtilValidate.isNotEmpty(redirectAddress) &&
> subject.endsWith("]") && subject.contains(" [To: ")) {
> +// Format of subject for redirected mail from sendMail
> service:
> +// "Original subject [To: , Cc: , Bcc:
> ]"
> +String origSendTo = StringUtils.substringBetween(subject,
> "[To: ", ", Cc:");
> +String origSendCc = StringUtils.substringBetween(subject, ",
> Cc: ", ", Bcc:");
> +String origSendBcc = StringUtils.substringBetween(subject, ",
> Bcc: ", "]");
> +
> +// ignore "null" Strings in subject
> +if (origSendTo != "null") commEventMap.put("toString",
> origSendTo);
> +if (origSendCc != "null") commEventMap.put("ccString",
> origSendCc);
> +if (origSendBcc != "null") commEventMap.put("bccString",
> origSendBcc);
> +
> +// Format of subject in commEvent: "Original subject
> [RedirectedTo: recipi...@example.com]"
> +subject = StringUtils.substringBefore(subject, "[To: ")
> ++ "[RedirectedTo: " + commEventMap.get("fromString")
> + "]";
> +commEventMap.put("subject", StringUtils.abbreviate(subject,
> 255));
> +}
> +
>  // populate the address (to/from/cc/bcc) data
>  populateAddressesFromMessage(wrapper, commEventMap);
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.

[Deepak Dixit]

-1

Kind Regards,
Deepak Dixit


On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 10:24 PM Martin Becker 
wrote:

> -1
>
> Martin Becker
>
>
>
>
> On 2020/01/24 10:27:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > Hi,>
> >
> > R16 is now an old distribution and has almost reached its end of
> support. We can soon expect a last release but we need to think about the
> next to be >
> > released package>
> >
> > Some would prefer to release R17 before releasing R18, some would prefer
> to bypass R17 release and directly publish R18 instead.>
> >
> > Vote:>
> > [ +1] Do not release R17 and directly publish R18 instead.>
> > [ -1]  Release R17 before releasing R18>
> >
> > We had already 3 months to discuss without reaching a consensus, so this
> vote will be only open for a week.>
> >
> > Note that it's not a formal vote to release R17 or R18, as that is
> another process documented at>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz>
>
> >
> > Thank you for your attention>
> >
> > Jacques>
> >
>
>
>