Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap
Ah, last but not least: I think we should at least wait for Freemarker 2.3.33 that we successfully tested on demo. The vote should be soon, hence the release. Le 08/05/2024 à 20:47, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Thanks to clarify Michael, Inline when needed... Le 08/05/2024 à 13:59, Michael Brohl a écrit : Hi everyone, my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to avoid the situation we have now: 1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago 2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by Jacques if I remember correctly I guess you speak about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995 ? 3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after 4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not rolled out for every component. I'm unsure that these changes are not complete for every component and even if it's the case it should not block the creation of a release branch. And if ever issues remain (not necessarily related to these changes) it's not a big deal to fix them once freezed. Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an almost stable trunk. So you speak about other known issues than https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995. Have you a clear view about them ? Else my answer to 4. should be reassure you, not a big deal. What helped me a lot in this recent experience is to review the demos logs (stable and trunk). I remember a project I worked on and was the last person to leave because they needed me to scrutinise the logs :) If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of working on the creation of the new branch. That would be good, we used roadmaps in the past. Not all among them were successful or even followed. IIRW the 1st one was mostly successful: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/4.x+Proposed+Roadmap+Items Others maybe less, just search "roadmap" in the wiki. Most were created by Sharan. Just to give an idea, here is one roadmap seriously discussed (most others were less). https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Roadmap+Diagrams+-+In+Progress We also need to plan the time we want to give to fix the release branch before releasing. We use to finish it in the current year. From my OFBiz experience, it's just a plan anyway, ie it can be shorter or longer. My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going with the flow of incoming pull requests. I hope I was more clear now. Yes, thanks Jacques Thanks and regards, Michael Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey: Hi Daniel, I am in favor of creating a new release. After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new features there. This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing development in the trunk. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford wrote: Hi Jacques, I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the difference...'. Could you restate it another way? Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)? I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x), but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to the branch might help us reach a de facto policy. I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work. Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future release branch. If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page: https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time the release branch was created. I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the weeds of discussion. Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first? As far as which commits are later applied to the
Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap
Thanks to clarify Michael, Inline when needed... Le 08/05/2024 à 13:59, Michael Brohl a écrit : Hi everyone, my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to avoid the situation we have now: 1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago 2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by Jacques if I remember correctly I guess you speak about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995 ? 3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after 4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not rolled out for every component. I'm unsure that these changes are not complete for every component and even if it's the case it should not block the creation of a release branch. And if ever issues remain (not necessarily related to these changes) it's not a big deal to fix them once freezed. Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an almost stable trunk. So you speak about other known issues than https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995. Have you a clear view about them ? Else my answer to 4. should be reassure you, not a big deal. What helped me a lot in this recent experience is to review the demos logs (stable and trunk). I remember a project I worked on and was the last person to leave because they needed me to scrutinise the logs :) If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of working on the creation of the new branch. That would be good, we used roadmaps in the past. Not all among them were successful or even followed. IIRW the 1st one was mostly successful: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/4.x+Proposed+Roadmap+Items Others maybe less, just search "roadmap" in the wiki. Most were created by Sharan. Just to give an idea, here is one roadmap seriously discussed (most others were less). https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Roadmap+Diagrams+-+In+Progress We also need to plan the time we want to give to fix the release branch before releasing. We use to finish it in the current year. From my OFBiz experience, it's just a plan anyway, ie it can be shorter or longer. My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going with the flow of incoming pull requests. I hope I was more clear now. Yes, thanks Jacques Thanks and regards, Michael Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey: Hi Daniel, I am in favor of creating a new release. After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new features there. This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing development in the trunk. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford wrote: Hi Jacques, I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the difference...'. Could you restate it another way? Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)? I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x), but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to the branch might help us reach a de facto policy. I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work. Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future release branch. If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page: https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time the release branch was created. I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the weeds of discussion. Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first? As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch, shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test burden before a public release can be
Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap
Thanks for confirming Le 08/05/2024 à 15:45, Pranay Pandey a écrit : Hi Jacques, Yeah, I wanted to say that. As long as we are sure of test coverage, all the critical paths are working. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 22:11, Jacques Le Roux wrote: Ha sorry Pranay, I did not get your point, I guess you were discussing before frezzing the release branch, right? Then of course we can't guarantee to have fixed all known bugs. Only blocker bugs (decided by the reporter and discussed if needed) and of course security bugs are blocking a release. Jacques Le 07/05/2024 à 17:42, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Hi Pranay, OK, but then only that? So far we backported any bug. So we would release a branch with bugs in? Le 07/05/2024 à 16:42, Pranay Pandey a écrit : Hi Jacques, what is a blocker bug, only security? I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the process level. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words, apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And then what is a blocker bug, only security? Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind: https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html HTH Jacques Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit : Dear Daniel, Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to address blockers for the upcoming release. I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller changes are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new features introduced. I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will help in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue the discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the OFBiz development community. Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford wrote: Hello all, I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are in this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we are probably close to an agreement on how to proceed. Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it seems there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk branch. Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming OFBiz release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05 branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a case-by-case basis. Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g. release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to denote the commit that was publicly released. I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed releases in the past. The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch. It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now might be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from trunk. Thanks, Dan. On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com wrote: Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks precisely? And that are their situations? BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks precisely? And WHAT are their situations? Sorry, typo -- Daniel Watford
CVE-2024-32113: Apache OFBiz: Path traversal leading to RCE
Severity: important Affected versions: - Apache OFBiz before 18.12.13 Description: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in Apache OFBiz.This issue affects Apache OFBiz: before 18.12.13. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 18.12.13, which fixes the issue. Credit: Qiyi Zhang (RacerZ) @secsys from Fudan (finder) References: https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html https://ofbiz.apache.org/security.html https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-13006 https://lists.apache.org/thread/np8vgzr06z6cwm3tz7cs3609bdrj8526 https://ofbiz.apache.org/ https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-32113
Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap
Hi Jacques, Yeah, I wanted to say that. As long as we are sure of test coverage, all the critical paths are working. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 22:11, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Ha sorry Pranay, > > I did not get your point, I guess you were discussing before frezzing the > release branch, right? > Then of course we can't guarantee to have fixed all known bugs. > Only blocker bugs (decided by the reporter and discussed if needed) and of > course security bugs are blocking a release. > > Jacques > > Le 07/05/2024 à 17:42, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > > Hi Pranay, > > > > OK, but then only that? So far we backported any bug. So we would > release a branch with bugs in? > > > > Le 07/05/2024 à 16:42, Pranay Pandey a écrit : > >> Hi Jacques, > >> > >> what is a blocker bug, only security? > >> I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the > process > >> level. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Pranay Pandey > >> > >> > >> On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux < > jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx > where > >>> the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other > words, > >>> apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and > the > >>> "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And > >>> then > >>> what is a blocker bug, only security? > >>> > >>> Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches > that > >>> we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind: > >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html > >>> > >>> HTH > >>> > >>> Jacques > >>> > >>> Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit : > Dear Daniel, > > Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I > liked > the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to > address blockers for the upcoming release. > > I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while > working on > the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new > releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller > >>> changes > are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration > for > existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the > new > features introduced. > > I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will > >>> help > in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue > >>> the > discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the > >>> OFBiz > development community. > > Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward. > > Best regards, > > Pranay Pandey > > > On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually > are > >>> in > > this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we > >>> are > > probably close to an agreement on how to proceed. > > > > Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it > >>> seems > > there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the > trunk > > branch. > > > > Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, > named > > something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to > > address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming > >>> OFBiz > > release. New features would not normally be applied to the > release-24.05 > > branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a > >>> case-by-case > > basis. > > > > Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, > and > > once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - > e.g. > > release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to > >>> denote > > the commit that was publicly released. > > > > I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed > >>> releases in > > the past. > > > > The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release > > process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development > community/PMC > > decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release > branch. > > > > It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement > of > > Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now > >>> might > > be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from > >>> trunk. > > Thanks, > > > > Dan. > > > > On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux < > >>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com > > wrote: > > > >> Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > >>>
Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap
Hi Michael, Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to have a structure in place for sure. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Wed, 8 May 2024 at 17:30, Michael Brohl wrote: > Hi everyone, > > my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk > (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to > avoid the situation we have now: > > 1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago > > 2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by > Jacques if I remember correctly > > 3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry > unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after > > 4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not > complete/not rolled out for every component. > > Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and > worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from > an almost stable trunk. > > If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was > happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of > working on the creation of the new branch. > > My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and > collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going > with the flow of incoming pull requests. > > I hope I was more clear now. > > Thanks and regards, > > Michael > > > Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey: > > Hi Daniel, > > > > I am in favor of creating a new release. > > > > After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new > > features there. > > > > This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing > > development in the trunk. > > > > Best regards, > > Pranay Pandey > > > > > > On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford wrote: > > > >> Hi Jacques, > >> > >> I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the > >> difference...'. Could you restate it another way? > >> > >> Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a > feature-freeze on > >> trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a > >> feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)? > >> > >> I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on > what > >> sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. > release-24.x), > >> but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to > >> the branch might help us reach a de facto policy. > >> > >> I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a > >> release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work. > >> Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release > where > >> we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature > was > >> very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future > >> release branch. > >> > >> If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been > >> stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page: > >> https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the > release > >> branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the > time > >> the release branch was created. > >> > >> I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the > >> weeds of discussion. > >> > >> Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for > >> the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important > >> features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first? > >> > >> As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch, > >> shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a > reminder > >> that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the > test > >> burden before a public release can be made? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Dan. > >> > >> On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux < > jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com > >> wrote: > >> > >>> What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx > >> where > >>> the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other > >> words, > >>> apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and > the > >>> "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And > >>> then > >>> what is a blocker bug, only security? > >>> > >>> Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches > >> that > >>> we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind: > >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html > >>> > >>> HTH > >>> > >>> Jacques > >>> > >>> Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit : > Dear Daniel, > > Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I > >> liked > the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to > address blockers for the upcoming release. > > I agree with Michael's proposal
Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap
Hi everyone, my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to avoid the situation we have now: 1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago 2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by Jacques if I remember correctly 3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after 4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not rolled out for every component. Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an almost stable trunk. If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of working on the creation of the new branch. My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going with the flow of incoming pull requests. I hope I was more clear now. Thanks and regards, Michael Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey: Hi Daniel, I am in favor of creating a new release. After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new features there. This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing development in the trunk. Best regards, Pranay Pandey On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford wrote: Hi Jacques, I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the difference...'. Could you restate it another way? Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)? I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x), but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to the branch might help us reach a de facto policy. I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work. Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future release branch. If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page: https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time the release branch was created. I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the weeds of discussion. Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first? As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch, shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test burden before a public release can be made? Thanks, Dan. On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words, apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And then what is a blocker bug, only security? Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind: https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html HTH Jacques Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit : Dear Daniel, Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to address blockers for the upcoming release. I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller changes are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new features introduced. I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will help in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue the discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the OFBiz development community. Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward. Best
Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] Apache OFBiz 18.12.13
OK, thanks Jacopo Le 08/05/2024 à 13:50, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : Yes, it is normal because that is the dev distribution folder: as soon as the release becomes official the files are moved to the official distribution folder: https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/ Jacopo On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 4:07 PM Jacques Le Roux wrote: Hi Jacopo, I see only KEYS TIA Jacqued Le 07/05/2024 à 11:41, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : The vote is successful with seven positive votes (all binding) and no negative votes. I am going to publish and announce the release soon. Jacopo On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 5:06 PM Jacopo Cappellato wrote: This is the vote thread to publish "Apache OFBiz 18.12.13", the thirteenth release from the release18.12 branch. The release files can be downloaded from here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ofbiz/ and are: * apache-ofbiz-18.12.13.zip * KEYS: text file with keys * apache-ofbiz-18.12.13.zip.asc: the detached signature file * apache-ofbiz-18.12.13.zip.sha512: checksum file Please download and test the zip file and its signatures (for instructions on testing the signatures see http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html). Vote: [ +1] release as Apache OFBiz 18.12.13 [ -1] do not release This vote is open for at least 5 days. For more details about this process please refer to http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
Re: [VOTE] [RESULT] Apache OFBiz 18.12.13
Yes, it is normal because that is the dev distribution folder: as soon as the release becomes official the files are moved to the official distribution folder: https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/ Jacopo On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 4:07 PM Jacques Le Roux wrote: > > Hi Jacopo, > > I see only KEYS > > TIA > > Jacqued > > Le 07/05/2024 à 11:41, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : > > The vote is successful with seven positive votes (all binding) and no > > negative votes. > > I am going to publish and announce the release soon. > > > > Jacopo > > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 5:06 PM Jacopo Cappellato > > wrote: > >> This is the vote thread to publish "Apache OFBiz 18.12.13", the thirteenth > >> release from the release18.12 branch. > >> > >> The release files can be downloaded from here: > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ofbiz/ > >> and are: > >> * apache-ofbiz-18.12.13.zip > >> * KEYS: text file with keys > >> * apache-ofbiz-18.12.13.zip.asc: the detached signature file > >> * apache-ofbiz-18.12.13.zip.sha512: checksum file > >> > >> Please download and test the zip file and its signatures (for > >> instructions on testing the signatures see > >> http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html). > >> > >> Vote: > >> [ +1] release as Apache OFBiz 18.12.13 > >> [ -1] do not release > >> > >> This vote is open for at least 5 days. > >> > >> For more details about this process please refer to > >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html