I think we can safely ignore. If a problem arises we hardwire the
dependency, so not a big deal at all
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018, 6:15 PM Girish Vasmatkar <
girish.vasmat...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> Hi Jacques
>
> It looks like every transitive dependency defined in our build.gradle to
> xml-apis
Hi Jacques
It looks like every transitive dependency defined in our build.gradle to
xml-apis is getting resolved to xml-apis:2.0.2.
+--- xom:xom:1.2.5
||+--- xml-apis:xml-apis:1.3.03 -> 2.0.2
+--- xml-apis:xml-apis:1.3.04 -> 2.0.2
org.apache.xmlrpc:xmlrpc-client:3.1.3
|\---
This is the vote thread to release a new bug fix release for the
release16.11 branch. This new release, "Apache OFBiz 16.11.05" will
supersede all the previous releases from the same branch.
The release files can be downloaded from here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ofbiz/
and are:
No feedback so far; I will proceed with the release preparation.
Jacopo
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:09 AM Jacopo Cappellato <
jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> I am ready to prepare the release files and start a vote but before I do I
> would like to double check about OFBIZ-4361: if
Hi Pierre,
Could you please clarify why we still need to keep these comment now that the
dependencies are in the graph.
Notably the comment you made
This diagram is missing:
* a dependency of Accounting on Manufacturing,
would be interesting if there was an explanation of the exact
Le 21/09/2018 à 13:29, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Hi,
I cleared by Gradle cache, so had to reload all.
my
I stumbled upon this is in log
Download
https://jcenter.bintray.com/xml-apis/xml-apis/2.0.2/xml-apis-2.0.2.pom
POM relocation to an other version number is not fully supported in
Hi,
I cleared by Gradle cache, so had to reload all.
I stumbled upon this is in log
Download
https://jcenter.bintray.com/xml-apis/xml-apis/2.0.2/xml-apis-2.0.2.pom
POM relocation to an other version number is not fully supported in Gradle :
xml-apis:xml-apis:2.0.2 relocated to
Thank you all for your inputs.
*Conclusions*: 1) All the 'SecurityPermission' data should be in the seed
data files.
2) All the 'SecurityGroup' and
'SecurityGroupPermission' data should be in the demo data files.
Apart from this, the 'SecurityGroup' and
+1
Jacques
Le 21/09/2018 à 07:49, Arun Patidar a écrit :
Deepak,
IMO, 'SecurityPermission' data should always be part of seed data. but
SecurityGroup and SecurityGroupPermission like a sample data so should be
part of demo data.
Kind Regards,
Arun Patidar
Director of Information
Hi folks,
Thanks for the detailed discussion.
ProductFacility is required in OFBiz for various processes like inventory
reservation, inventory valuation etc.
If we make ProductFacility optional, then we need code changes in these
workflows and also make sure they are tested properly.
A 'quick
+1 Arun
Vaibhav Jain
Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Systems
m: 782-834-1900 e: vaibhav.j...@hotwaxsystems.com
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 1:13 PM Rishi Solanki
wrote:
> +1 for Arun's thought on considering SecurityPermission as seed and
> SecurityGroup and SecurityGroupPermission as demo.
+1 for Arun's thought on considering SecurityPermission as seed and
SecurityGroup and SecurityGroupPermission as demo.
--
Rishi Solanki
Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: +91-9893287847
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at
+1
Le vendredi 21 sept. 2018 à 11:19:39 (+0530), Arun Patidar a écrit :
> Deepak,
>
> IMO, 'SecurityPermission' data should always be part of seed data. but
> SecurityGroup and SecurityGroupPermission like a sample data so should be
> part of demo data.
>
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Arun
13 matches
Mail list logo
