Re: What IDE for Ofbiz

[Charl Bouwer]

Yes Taher
It would help me a lot as n intellij user

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Taher Alkhateeb  wrote:

> Speaking of Intellij, I'm thinking of incorporating the plugin in gradle so
> also fixup the classpath and everything. Is that something people would
> like?
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
> jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > IntelliJ IDEA is a great tool!
> >
> > Jacopo
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Forrest Rae  wrote:
> >
> > > IntelliJ IDEA, hands down.  The Java/Groovy debugging support is
> > > superior.  The IntelliJ Platform SDK is amazing, though not for the
> > > faint of heart.  There is a learning curve, but it's worth it.  There
> is
> > > a reason Google picked it to be the base for Android Studio.
> > >
> > > On 07/19/2016 12:13 AM, Pranay Pandey wrote:
> > > >> Eclipse or IntelliJ IDEA(Free version )
> > > >
> > > > Both of these work well. I started using IntelliJ since last 6 months
> > and
> > > > personally I like it very much.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Pranay Pandey
> > > > HotWax Systems
> > > > http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 5:05 AM, james yong 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Puwanat,
> > > >>
> > > >> Please make sure that you are registered with OFBiz's mailing list.
> > Else
> > > >> your post at Nabble will not reach the mailing list.
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >> James
> > > >>
> > > >> puwanat_sr wrote
> > > >>> Dear All
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm new with OFBIZ
> > > >>> May I ask you about the best IDE I should use for OFBIZ project
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Eclipse or IntelliJ IDEA(Free version )
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thank you very much
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> View this message in context:
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/What-IDE-for-Ofbiz-tp4688352p4689453.html
> > > >> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Anticipate the end of life of the 13.07 branch and backport some non-bug related changes to the 14.12 and 15.12 branches

[Charl Bouwer]

Hi all

Where does it leave a new user that is planning to become a contributor. I
am past the R stage and meeting my business partner next week to inform
him I already have 2 possibly 3 clients that is interested in a POC. In the
next month I am building a POC based on the 13.07 build.

I was already able to setup eclipse with debugging enabled and have both
the trunk and 13.07 SVN repositories. I am busy doing the same with
Intellij/GIT setup, my preferred IDE environment. I am planning to use the
POC to customise for my region, including the initial seed data. Which in
turn will lead to me working on the multi tenancy aspect.

Should I continue with 13.07 as base with the intention to have a
production server in the next say 3-6 months.
Any suggestions on how I should proceed from here?

Sorry I only subscribed to the dev-list today

Thanks
Charl


On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Sharan Foga  wrote:

> Hi Pierre
>
> I'd be happy summarise what my understanding is, but beforehand I'd like
> to point out that any decision on this discussion thread isn't “the shared
> conclusion of the PMC”. The discussion was raised on this list specifically
> to get feedback from our community and it's from that feedback that any
> conclusions are drawn or decisions taken .
>
> My understanding is that there was general consensus for the following:
>
> - There would be no more releases from 13.07 so the current release that
> is out would be the last one in that series
>
> - We would not backport any of the gradle changes into the 14.12. or 15.12
> branches because it would cause instability
>
> - We would leave 14.12 and 15.12 as unreleased branches as they are now
> (and not make them into releases as to do that we would need to remove all
> the jar files and this would create instability).
>
> - We would focus on implementing the gradle changes into the trunk and
> then creating and stabilising a 16.x release ASAP
>
> - The benefits for our community are that developers and service providers
> will still have access to the complete codebase for 14.12 and 15.12
> including the special purpose components to be able to support their client
> base.
>
> I suggested taking the discussion to the development list so that we can
> talk in more detail about the release planning and also the duration of
> support the unreleased branches. This again, will be a community discussion
> and decision. Once we have these details we can communicate them to our
> user community.
>
> This was my understanding, so if anyone has a another interpretation or
> understanding then please feel free to comment.
>
> Thanks
> Sharan
>
> On 2016-06-30 15:40 (+0200), Pierre Smits  wrote:
> > It seems to me that Sharan is jumping the fence a bit to soon. Multiple
> > suggestions have gathered support.
> > This makes any 'this solution', without repeating what that solution is ,
> > multi-interpretable and would not only continue the discussion. But also
> > the confusion.
> >
> > I suggest to repeat once more what the shared conclusion of the PMC is
> > regarding this discussion, so that the entire community can anticipate to
> > what is coming in the near future, and what the PMC will take to the dev
> ml
> > for planning purposes regarding the short term actions.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > ORRTIZ.COM 
> > OFBiz based solutions & services
> >
> > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Sharan Foga 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Everyone
> > >
> > > Thanks very much for the feedback. I'm glad that this solution will
> > > resolve our current problems without taking away any functionality
> from the
> > > service providers or developers that are using the unreleased branches.
> > >
> > > Our next step will be to create and stabilise the 16.x release ASAP so
> > > that our user community will have another release available. This will
> > > become our top priority.
> > >
> > > I suggest that we close off the discussion now as I think we've had
> quite
> > > a detailed discussion and it looks like we have come to a consensus and
> > > resolved the issues. We can now take the discussion back to the dev
> list
> > > where we can talk about the timings, release roadmap and also the
> support
> > > timeframe for the unreleased branches.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Sharan
> > >
> > > On 2016-06-30 11:01 (+0200), Michael Brohl 
> > > wrote:
> > > > Great idea, +1
> > > >
> > > > Michael Brohl
> > > > ecomify GmbH
> > > > www.ecomify.de
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am 30.06.16 um 09:05 schrieb Sharan Foga:
> > > > > Thanks for the response -Jacopo. (You posted a minute before I
> did!)
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway I think that I might have an idea that could solve our
> problem
> > > – let's just leave 14.12 and 15.12 as unreleased branches.
> > > > >
> > > > > The jar