"Begin replacing ..." is not an actional item.
How can we vote on something that is ill-defined? Just saying.
On 04/26/2015 08:09 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
+1 for being too early.
-1 for going ahead as a project
+1 for a PoC and impact analysis
Ron
On 26/04/2015 6:46 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
Fi
+1 for being too early.
-1 for going ahead as a project
+1 for a PoC and impact analysis
Ron
On 26/04/2015 6:46 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
First of all, a big thanks to Adrian for taking this step, this RtV
(Request to Vote) to get clarity from the community. A lot has been said
over the last week
On 04/26/2015 06:13 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
On 04/26/2015 02:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
No one is going to invest their time and effort in a POC unless they
have the approval and support of the community. I don't think you're
going to see a POC before a vote.
I would.
I haven't yet looked at
On 04/26/2015 02:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
No one is going to invest their time and effort in a POC unless they
have the approval and support of the community. I don't think you're
going to see a POC before a vote.
I would.
On 04/26/2015 09:44 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
As was discussed last week, there is some interest in replacing some
(or all) of OFBiz with Moqui (http://www.moqui.org/framework/index.html).
To the scope reasonable, I propose that we begin by converting0 the
following parts of the OFBiz framework w
First of all, a big thanks to Adrian for taking this step, this RtV
(Request to Vote) to get clarity from the community. A lot has been said
over the last week regarding adopting a new architecture for a future
release.
When discussions, like fire, die down it is good to find out where the
communi
Thank you for the clarification.
I'll stick to my vote and my arguments then.
Michael Brohl
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de
Am 26.04.15 um 22:33 schrieb Adrian Crum:
No, it is not a vote for a POC. If the community agrees we need to
make a change, then we can create a Jira issue, branch, POC, etc.
No, it is not a vote for a POC. If the community agrees we need to make
a change, then we can create a Jira issue, branch, POC, etc.
No one is going to go to all that work if in the end the community says
"Nope, don't want it."
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 4/2
Adrian,
that's what I tried to say and what Ron asked: if it's a vote for a POC
and not a final decision to replace OFBiz with Moqui: +1
The vote title is not about a POC but about a decision to begin
replacing. For me this sounds like a difference. Might be a language
problem on my side.
No one is going to invest their time and effort in a POC unless they
have the approval and support of the community. I don't think you're
going to see a POC before a vote.
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 4/26/2015 6:39 PM, Michael Brohl wrote:
-1 (not binding)
Th
The Buildbot has detected a build exception on builder ofbiz-branch12 while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-branch12/builds/202
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSc
The Buildbot has detected a restored build on builder ofbiz-branch13 while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-branch13/builds/296
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSch
The Buildbot has detected a build exception on builder ofbiz-branch14 while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-branch14/builds/108
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSc
The Buildbot has detected a build exception on builder ofbiz-trunk while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk/builds/847
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSchedule
-1 (not binding)
This is *not* a vote against moving to Moqui or replacing parts of OFBiz
with Moqui or...
I simply feel there is not enough discussion, deeper insights in the
effects, a clear path how to do it etc., at least for me. I would prefer
to have some scenarios described, take a de
The Buildbot has detected a restored build on builder ofbiz-trunk while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk/builds/845
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchScheduler
The Buildbot has detected a restored build on builder ofbiz-branch12 while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-branch12/builds/201
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSch
The Buildbot has detected a build exception on builder ofbiz-branch13 while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-branch13/builds/295
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSc
The Buildbot has detected a build exception on builder ofbiz-trunk while
building ASF Buildbot. Full details are available at:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk/builds/844
Buildbot URL: http://ci.apache.org/
Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu
Build Reason: The AnyBranchSchedule
Is this a proposal for a POC?
If so, where will this be done and what is estimated amount of time
required to complete the POC.
What will be required to complete te conversion if the POC is successful?
What is the impact on the framework as a product if it is successful?
Ron
On 26/04/2015 10:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6268?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Adrian Crum updated OFBIZ-6268:
---
Attachment: OFBIZ-6268.patch
Improved patch. Hard-coded class paths have been replaced with properties
As was discussed last week, there is some interest in replacing some (or
all) of OFBiz with Moqui (http://www.moqui.org/framework/index.html).
To the scope reasonable, I propose that we begin by converting the
following parts of the OFBiz framework with Moqui:
Entity Engine
Service Engine
Sec
On Apr 26, 2015, at 4:20 PM, Adrian Crum
wrote:
> We have to start somewhere. Replacing all of OFBiz with Moqui is a
> non-starter. We simply don't have the resources for it. So let's start small.
>
> Instead of me trying to guess which suitable subject line is hidden in your
> head, why don'
+1 to Jacopo's POV.
The discussion had been very good with a positive tone and a lot of
factual issues been raised.
I have not seen a POC project. This would seem to be a prerequisite for
a decision of this magnitude.
In the past, there has been a discussion about "marketing" the framework
It does look like a lot of long-standing big issues are being looked at.
However, they are all independent projects that can be accepted or
rejected without affecting the other major projects.
Most of them (Maven, git, directory structure) are actually pretty short
to implement even if they re
We have to start somewhere. Replacing all of OFBiz with Moqui is a
non-starter. We simply don't have the resources for it. So let's start
small.
Instead of me trying to guess which suitable subject line is hidden in
your head, why don't you just tell us what you think is acceptable to
vote on
On Apr 26, 2015, at 3:09 PM, Adrian Crum
wrote:
> How about "Replace framework core functionality - like entity engine, service
> engine, and security with Moqui."
>
> Is that specific enough?
>
Not really: we have talked about bringing the whole Moqui codebase into the
OFBiz trunk (bad ide
Hey Everyone,
It seems like too many massive changes are being looked at at the same
time. Moqui, Git, Maven and Directory Structure. Shouldn't all these items
be looked at given that one affects the other?
Taher Alkhateeb
On Apr 26, 2015 4:10 PM, "Adrian Crum"
wrote:
> How about "Replace frame
How about "Replace framework core functionality - like entity engine,
service engine, and security with Moqui."
Is that specific enough?
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 4/26/2015 1:47 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
The discussion is interesting and fascinating but i
The discussion is interesting and fascinating but in this thread completely
different ideas have been expressed: from forking Moqui into OFBiz to rewriting
OFBiz applications from scratch on top of Moqui etc...
My vote will be negative if the vote will be as generic as "replace OFBiz
framework
This has been discussed for nearly a week now. Shall we start a vote?
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 4/20/2015 6:31 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
Again, as discussed at the ApacheCon in Austin we should start setting
up a plan how to best move the ERP application to the M
Adrian Crum created OFBIZ-6304:
--
Summary: Add Unit Tests For Startup Code
Key: OFBIZ-6304
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6304
Project: OFBiz
Issue Type: Improvement
C
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6302?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Pierre Smits updated OFBIZ-6302:
Attachment: OFBIZ-6302-Certificate.patch
This patch addresses the issue.
> Ftl to Widget: improve V
33 matches
Mail list logo
