Re: Dockerfiles for OFBiz

Sounds great. I would recommend a combination of docker + docker-compose + scripts + environment files to get everything fully automated and also parameterized On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:00 PM Michael Brohl wrote: > > Hi Taher, > > Am 13.03.20 um 18:21 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: > > Hello Michael,

Re: Dockerfiles for OFBiz

Hi Taher, Am 13.03.20 um 18:21 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: Hello Michael, 1. Absolutely from my side. Deployment becomes drastically simpler 2. Which version of what? 3. Hmm, I'm not sure of the purpose / benefit of having that. No one just "deploys" OFBiz without customization. And even if so,

Re: Dockerfiles for OFBiz

Hi Taher, Am 13.03.20 um 18:21 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: Hello Michael, 1. Absolutely from my side. Deployment becomes drastically simpler 2. Which version of what? There is a pull request from Pierre, see my remarks towards this version in the issue comments. I've provided an

Re: Dockerfiles for OFBiz

As I have stated in the ticket (and it being good enough to repeat it here): I have been working on a solution that will enable users (developers/adopters/etc.) to generate containers, that either will be based: - on a branch (trunk or whatever) without plugins and git-aware - on a branch

Re: Dockerfiles for OFBiz

Hello Michael, 1. Absolutely from my side. Deployment becomes drastically simpler 2. Which version of what? 3. Hmm, I'm not sure of the purpose / benefit of having that. No one just "deploys" OFBiz without customization. And even if so, if you have comfy scripts in the code base, then that would

Dockerfiles for OFBiz

Hi everyone, please have a look at the solutions provided in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10407. The main questions for the mailing list: 1. do we want to add and maintain Docker files in our codebase? 2. if yes, which version should we use? 3. if yes, additionally: would it

Re: Adopting Github Workflow

I have been following this discussion for a while.  However, I still wonder if this discussion is about which of the two options is the better one. In my opinion, the discussion should rather be about whether the potential benefits of a new process justify the effort to change the old one. It

Re: Git history problem

Some notes before I forget: 1. Except if Infra (or I) missed something, GH "Rebase and Merge" does not always create a linear commit history. See the log of ofbiz-site after the "Rebase and Merge" I did for PR1. If commits happen beetwen it's does not deliver a linear commit history. 2.

Re: Git history problem

Hi All, This is done, you may check with an open GH PR We will now ask Infra to add GH Issues[1]. It needs again a PMC agreement. [1] https://help.github.com/en/github/managing-your-work-on-github/creating-an-issue Jacques Le 10/03/2020 à 11:22, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : The infra team

Re: [apache/ofbiz-plugins] Ofbiz 11451: add the license (#8)

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:41 PM Pierre Smits wrote: > Indeed that is what you did. What *we* did, yes. > But while convenient when everything was in > one repository, that paradigm doesn't work so well with > multiple repositories. +1 > See the thread about the confusion regarding >

Re: [apache/ofbiz-plugins] Ofbiz 11451: add the license (#8)

Indeed that is what you did. But while convenient when everything was in one repository, that paradigm doesn't work so well with multiple repositories. See the thread about the confusion regarding releases in the repos and missing verification artefact. IIRW, our release strategy is currently a

Re: [apache/ofbiz-plugins] Ofbiz 11451: add the license (#8)

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 12:55 PM Pierre Smits wrote: > IMO we should not confuse generating convenience packages (combining base > and plugins releases) with doing releases. > So far, all the official releases we have published are for the full package. Jacopo

[GitHub] [ofbiz-tools] PierreSmits opened a new pull request #1: Implemented: have a license (OFBIZ-11453)

PierreSmits opened a new pull request #1: Implemented: have a license (OFBIZ-11453) URL: https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/pull/1 Added the license This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to

Re: [apache/ofbiz-plugins] Ofbiz 11451: add the license (#8)

IMO we should not confuse generating convenience packages (combining base and plugins releases) with doing releases. Met vriendelijke groet, Pierre Smits *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz since 2008 (without privileges) *Apache Trafodion

Re: [apache/ofbiz-plugins] Ofbiz 11451: add the license (#8)

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 12:01 PM Pierre Smits wrote: > @Jacopo I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Can you elaborate? Yes, I have added my comments as a code review in the PR: however I recommend that you spend some time learning how our license file is composed before you

Re: [apache/ofbiz-plugins] Ofbiz 11451: add the license (#8)

@Jacopo I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Can you elaborate? Met vriendelijke groet, Pierre Smits *Proud* *contributor** of* Apache OFBiz since 2008 (without privileges) *Apache Trafodion , Vice President* *Apache Directory

Re: Adopting Github Workflow

Le 13/03/2020 à 11:40, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 11:33 AM Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: [...] I have asked at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19950 if we could have GH issues. Yes, I saw your comment but I am wondering if the way

Re: Adopting Github Workflow

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 11:33 AM Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > [...] > I have asked at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19950 if we > could have GH issues. > Yes, I saw your comment but I am wondering if the way you have phrased your question [*] will make

Re: Adopting Github Workflow

Le 13/03/2020 à 11:29, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 10:20 PM Pierre Smits wrote: [...] As for PMC Members claiming that the Github services (repositories etc.) are not *official* ASF tools, I suggest these persons stop this kind of FUD (and maybe check back with the

Re: Adopting Github Workflow

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 10:20 PM Pierre Smits wrote: > [...] > As for PMC Members claiming that the Github services (repositories etc.) > are not *official* ASF tools, I suggest these persons stop this kind of FUD > (and maybe check back with the ASF). > Pierre, rather than accusing others of

Re: Adopting Github Workflow

Hi all, I'd like to encourage everyone to visit the wiki page https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/GITHUB+plus+GIT+VS+JIRA+plus+GIT, read carefully, check, dicuss and ask questions to get to a good information base for an important decision to make. Thanks everyone, Michael