Re: confirm unsubscribe from dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Any problem here ? Jacques Le 28/07/2018 à 15:05, julian.leich...@ecomify.de a écrit : Zitat von dev-h...@ofbiz.apache.org: Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the dev@ofbiz.apache.org mailing list. I'm working for my owner, who can be reached at dev-ow...@ofbiz.apache.org. To confirm that you would like julian.leich...@ecomify.de removed from the dev mailing list, please send a short reply to this address: dev-uc.1532783119.aindcpacollcmadobehc-julian.leichert=ecomify...@ofbiz.apache.org Usually, this happens when you just hit the "reply" button. If this does not work, simply copy the address and paste it into the "To:" field of a new message. or click here: mailto:dev-uc.1532783119.aindcpacollcmadobehc-julian.leichert=ecomify...@ofbiz.apache.org I haven't checked whether your address is currently on the mailing list. To see what address you used to subscribe, look at the messages you are receiving from the mailing list. Each message has your address hidden inside its return path; for example, m...@xdd.ff.com receives messages with return path: -mary=xdd.ff@ofbiz.apache.org. Some mail programs are broken and cannot handle long addresses. If you cannot reply to this request, instead send a message to and put the entire address listed above into the "Subject:" line. --- Administrative commands for the dev list --- I can handle administrative requests automatically. Please do not send them to the list address! Instead, send your message to the correct command address: To subscribe to the list, send a message to: To remove your address from the list, send a message to: Send mail to the following for info and FAQ for this list: Similar addresses exist for the digest list: To get messages 123 through 145 (a maximum of 100 per request), mail: To get an index with subject and author for messages 123-456 , mail: They are always returned as sets of 100, max 2000 per request, so you'll actually get 100-499. To receive all messages with the same subject as message 12345, send a short message to: The messages should contain one line or word of text to avoid being treated as sp@m, but I will ignore their content. Only the ADDRESS you send to is important. You can start a subscription for an alternate address, for example "john@host.domain", just add a hyphen and your address (with '=' instead of '@') after the command word: To stop subscription for this address, mail: In both cases, I'll send a confirmation message to that address. When you receive it, simply reply to it to complete your subscription. If despite following these instructions, you do not get the desired results, please contact my owner at dev-ow...@ofbiz.apache.org. Please be patient, my owner is a lot slower than I am ;-) --- Enclosed is a copy of the request I received. Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9057 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jul 2018 13:05:19 - Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:19 + Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1E0EF18045C for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:19 + (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NouOET5ZE-QM for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:18 + (UTC) Received: from mail.ecomify.de (mail.ecomify.de [178.77.98.9]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 61C305F21E for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:18 + (UTC) Received: from localhost (mail.ecomify.de [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ecomify.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0B2120 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:05:17 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at ecomify.de Received: from mail.ecomify.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lvps178-77-98-9.dedicated.hosteurope.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XE8YNMJ9SZzs for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:05:15 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:15 + Message-ID: <20180728130515.horde.u9dtwtz3y0b5gpmgvqqw...@webmail.ecomify.de> From: julian.leich...@ecomify.de To: dev-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org Subject: . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
For what it's worth (nobody here knows me), +1 for OpenJDK. - Original Message -From: Taher Alkhateeb To: OFBIZ Development Mailing List Sent: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 08:06:44 - (UTC)Subject: Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think Ireally dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headacheinvolved. Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problemswith OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugin but Icannot recall any serious issues. On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl wrote: > Hi devs,>> a quick heads up for this topic.>> After following the release > strategy and thinking more about it, I think> that most users will go with a > subscription model and subscribe for an> LTS version. The costs are moderate > [1] and I assume that few users will> go through a repeating 6 month "early > access - update - test - go live"> circle for free Java versions.>> Java 11 > EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.>> The latest Intellij > Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that> it will come for > Eclipse Photon shortly also.>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 > release on Java 8 or Java 11.> We have no fixed release date yet so we might > have time to do it.>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will > support Java 11.>> What do people think?>> Best regards,>> Michael Brohl> > ecomify GmbH> www.ecomify.de>>> [1]>> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html>> > [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/> Michael Brohl> Geschftsfhrer>> > Fon +49 521 448 157-91> Fax +49 521 448 157-99> Mobil +49 160 3664918> Xing > xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl>> > Company and Management Headquarters:> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, > 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, > www.ecomify.de>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683> Chief > Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl>> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 > schrieb Michael Brohl:> > Hi devs,> >> > this is just an initial information > and dicussion starter to make> > everyone aware of this:> >> > the Oracle > Java release model is changing from a feature based to a> > time based model > [1]. One major drawback is that there will be no more> > public patch > releases for older versions once a new release is> > published, if I > understand correctly.> >> > We'll have to discuss if this affects the project > in terms of support> > for the latest public Java releases. If we want to > stay up-to-date> > according to the public releases, we'll have to establish > a process to> > early check the new features and changes of a coming release > and maybe> > release more often.> >> > We might even have to support the > latest Java release along with the> > current LTS release to cover both users > with and without commercial> > support? I'm not sure.> >> > What do you > think?> >> > Best regards,> >> > Michael> >> > [1] > https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/> >> >>
Re: Inventory Cycle Count feature gap
Hi Yashwant, Besides the scenario you described, I'm working on a retail scenario, selling goods in refrigerators/containers, when a door open/close, a count action is triggered and fulfilled by RFID, the variance will be generated to an auto payed order if the door is opened/closed by a customer. Regards, Shi Jinghai -邮件原件- 发件人: Yashwant Dhakad [mailto:yashwant.dha...@hotwaxsystems.com] 发送时间: 2018年7月28日 19:37 收件人: dev@ofbiz.apache.org 抄送: Yashwant Dhakad 主题: Inventory Cycle Count feature gap Hello All, Currently, we don't have any user interface to do cycle count for the warehouse, Where user can create or manage cycle count for different locations within any facility. Authorized users to approve or reject the count and record variance. Also, the recorded variance against counted/scanned locations can be made available in the form of the report on a daily basis. Based on this I am proposing this feature where we can record and manage the cycle count through different sessions in following steps: 1. Create Cycle Count session: User can create a new cycle count session by scanning any location from the facility and system would list all the inventory items or product ids. The user can physically count or scan the inventory/product and update the physical count. Apart from this, user can also be allowed to manually add any not listed inventory item or product in the same session. Once record count is completed user can submit the cycle count session for review. As soon as the session is created the added locations can be locked from honoring any inward or outward inventory movement or transactions through them. 2. Find Counting session: On this screen, User can view all the existing sessions and further filter by session id, facility, location and status. 3. Review Cycle Count session: On this screen, any authorized user can review the cycle count for open sessions and accept or reject the recorded count, once done system would create the necessary variance to corresponding inventory item or product and update the ATP/QOH accordingly. 4. Variance Report screen: On this screen, the user can view the actual variance based on facility, location, product/inventory and date. 5. Later on if required we can also schedule the submitted location for next cycle count by setting next counting date. This would allow to user see all the pending location on any given date where cycle count is due. And can start new sessions for the same. Please share your thoughts and we make the necessary changes in the workflow based on that feedback. Thanks & Regards -- Yashwant Dhakad
Re: confirm unsubscribe from dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Zitat von dev-h...@ofbiz.apache.org: Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the dev@ofbiz.apache.org mailing list. I'm working for my owner, who can be reached at dev-ow...@ofbiz.apache.org. To confirm that you would like julian.leich...@ecomify.de removed from the dev mailing list, please send a short reply to this address: dev-uc.1532783119.aindcpacollcmadobehc-julian.leichert=ecomify...@ofbiz.apache.org Usually, this happens when you just hit the "reply" button. If this does not work, simply copy the address and paste it into the "To:" field of a new message. or click here: mailto:dev-uc.1532783119.aindcpacollcmadobehc-julian.leichert=ecomify...@ofbiz.apache.org I haven't checked whether your address is currently on the mailing list. To see what address you used to subscribe, look at the messages you are receiving from the mailing list. Each message has your address hidden inside its return path; for example, m...@xdd.ff.com receives messages with return path: -mary=xdd.ff@ofbiz.apache.org. Some mail programs are broken and cannot handle long addresses. If you cannot reply to this request, instead send a message to and put the entire address listed above into the "Subject:" line. --- Administrative commands for the dev list --- I can handle administrative requests automatically. Please do not send them to the list address! Instead, send your message to the correct command address: To subscribe to the list, send a message to: To remove your address from the list, send a message to: Send mail to the following for info and FAQ for this list: Similar addresses exist for the digest list: To get messages 123 through 145 (a maximum of 100 per request), mail: To get an index with subject and author for messages 123-456 , mail: They are always returned as sets of 100, max 2000 per request, so you'll actually get 100-499. To receive all messages with the same subject as message 12345, send a short message to: The messages should contain one line or word of text to avoid being treated as sp@m, but I will ignore their content. Only the ADDRESS you send to is important. You can start a subscription for an alternate address, for example "john@host.domain", just add a hyphen and your address (with '=' instead of '@') after the command word: To stop subscription for this address, mail: In both cases, I'll send a confirmation message to that address. When you receive it, simply reply to it to complete your subscription. If despite following these instructions, you do not get the desired results, please contact my owner at dev-ow...@ofbiz.apache.org. Please be patient, my owner is a lot slower than I am ;-) --- Enclosed is a copy of the request I received. Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9057 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jul 2018 13:05:19 - Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:19 + Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1E0EF18045C for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:19 + (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NouOET5ZE-QM for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:18 + (UTC) Received: from mail.ecomify.de (mail.ecomify.de [178.77.98.9]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 61C305F21E for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:18 + (UTC) Received: from localhost (mail.ecomify.de [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ecomify.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0B2120 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:05:17 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at ecomify.de Received: from mail.ecomify.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lvps178-77-98-9.dedicated.hosteurope.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XE8YNMJ9SZzs for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:05:15 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 13:05:15 + Message-ID: <20180728130515.horde.u9dtwtz3y0b5gpmgvqqw...@webmail.ecomify.de> From: julian.leich...@ecomify.de To: dev-unsubscr...@ofbiz.apache.org Subject: . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline
Re: buildbot exception in on ofbizTrunkFrameworkPlugins
It seems false positive. All test passed on the local machine. Thanks & Regards -- Deepak Dixit On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 4:41 PM, wrote: > The Buildbot has detected a build exception on builder > ofbizTrunkFrameworkPlugins while building . Full details are available at: > https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbizTrunkFrameworkPlugins/builds/313 > > Buildbot URL: https://ci.apache.org/ > > Buildslave for this Build: lares_ubuntu > > Build Reason: downstream > Build Source Stamp: [branch ofbiz/ofbiz-framework/trunk] 1836886 > Blamelist: deepak > > BUILD FAILED: exception upload_1 > > Sincerely, > -The Buildbot > > > >
Inventory Cycle Count feature gap
Hello All, Currently, we don't have any user interface to do cycle count for the warehouse, Where user can create or manage cycle count for different locations within any facility. Authorized users to approve or reject the count and record variance. Also, the recorded variance against counted/scanned locations can be made available in the form of the report on a daily basis. Based on this I am proposing this feature where we can record and manage the cycle count through different sessions in following steps: 1. Create Cycle Count session: User can create a new cycle count session by scanning any location from the facility and system would list all the inventory items or product ids. The user can physically count or scan the inventory/product and update the physical count. Apart from this, user can also be allowed to manually add any not listed inventory item or product in the same session. Once record count is completed user can submit the cycle count session for review. As soon as the session is created the added locations can be locked from honoring any inward or outward inventory movement or transactions through them. 2. Find Counting session: On this screen, User can view all the existing sessions and further filter by session id, facility, location and status. 3. Review Cycle Count session: On this screen, any authorized user can review the cycle count for open sessions and accept or reject the recorded count, once done system would create the necessary variance to corresponding inventory item or product and update the ATP/QOH accordingly. 4. Variance Report screen: On this screen, the user can view the actual variance based on facility, location, product/inventory and date. 5. Later on if required we can also schedule the submitted location for next cycle count by setting next counting date. This would allow to user see all the pending location on any given date where cycle count is due. And can start new sessions for the same. Please share your thoughts and we make the necessary changes in the workflow based on that feedback. Thanks & Regards -- Yashwant Dhakad
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Hi Mathieu, my goal is to actively inform users about our roadmap and provide information on how the project will deal with the new Java release model. Users testing OFBiz for their needs in a professional environment also check if a project has answers to these questions so I am wrapping my mind around it. This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer Java versions just for the sake of it. Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin: I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. What do people think? I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices. I agree! Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released, Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time, non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more. OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription). So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we can stay with Java 8 for a while. On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch with release 17.12. I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more opinions about that. This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java releases too. Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a Java 11 branch? This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you mentioned. In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that they have to subscribe for further updates. If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the release branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time. We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform users about compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can provide some compatibility matrix or else. Thanks for your thoughts, Michael smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Hello Michael, Michael Brohl writes: > a quick heads up for this topic. > > After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I > think that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe > for an LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few > users will go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update - > test - go live" circle for free Java versions. > > Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it. > > I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java > 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. > > Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. > > What do people think? I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices. Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released, OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java releases too. Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a Java 11 branch? -- Mathieu Lirzin GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Hi Taher, I would prefer if you start a new thread for this because it's a complete new topic. If it turns out that the community wants to work on a Java 11 update, I would file an umbrella task for it and your issue OFBIZ-9972 would be a sub-task (not the only one I think) of this. Thanks you, Michael Brohl ecomify GmbH www.ecomify.de Am 28.07.18 um 11:29 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: I see. well this means we have to do multiple things: - First we need to upgrade gradle - I have no preference with release 17 Java version support Now the problem with upgrading gradle in a nutshell is that you can no longer have spaces in server commands. So ./gradlew "ofbiz --start" will not work because of the space between "ofbiz" and "--start" and that's why I created a JIRA for this issue [1]. I'm not sure what is the best solution, one idea that came to me is perhaps to pass the args to a string. So for example: ./gradlew ofbiz -Pcmd1="--load-data readers=seed" ofbiz -Pcmd2="--start --portoffset=1" Maybe another option is to just run one "ofbiz" task and then pass multiple commands each in a project paramter -Pcmd1= -Pcmd2= -Pcmd3= ... Another option is to hard wire all commands like we did back in Ant days. I'm not sure what is the best solution there, and I don't mean to hijack this thread, but one thing depends on another thing. Should we start a new thread for that? Collect ideas from the community? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9972 On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Michael Brohl wrote: Because OpenJDK is the base for the Oracle JDK and Oracle is working on Open JDK, I assume we will have the same problems. It can also be that the two will be one product soon. Why should Oracle support Open JDK with long term updates for free? I did not find a clear roadmap for Open JDK so it's unclear to me how long the versions will be supported. I think Linux distributions will follow the LTS release cycle also, because of the same reasons. Here's a statement for Red Hat: https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013 (at the bottom). Most sources of information describe the Open JDK as a reference implementation which is less stable than the Oracle JDK. Personally, I have almost no experience using Open JDK in productive, professional environments. There were problems years ago which I do not remember exactly and we use Oracle JDK since then. I think we should support Oracle JDK because professional users most likely will use it and it would be a bad sign if OFBiz shows no official support for it. I also don't like the release model but the costs are moderate and using the LTS version, there is no headache feature wise. Java 11 LTS will be stable until 2023 or 2026 if you choose the extended subscription. Lots of time to prepare for the next LTS version... Best regards, Michael Brohl ecomify GmbH www.ecomify.de Am 28.07.18 um 10:06 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think I really dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headache involved. Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problems with OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugin but I cannot recall any serious issues. On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl wrote: Hi devs, a quick heads up for this topic. After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I think that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe for an LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few users will go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update - test - go live" circle for free Java versions. Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it. The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also. I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. What do people think? Best regards, Michael Brohl ecomify GmbH www.ecomify.de [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/ Michael Brohl Geschäftsführer Fon +49 521 448 157-91 Fax +49 521 448 157-99 Mobil+49 160 3664918 Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl Company and Management Headquarters: ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683 Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl: Hi devs, this is just an initial information and dicussion starter to make everyone aware of this: the Oracle Java release model is changing from a feature based to a time
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
I see. well this means we have to do multiple things: - First we need to upgrade gradle - I have no preference with release 17 Java version support Now the problem with upgrading gradle in a nutshell is that you can no longer have spaces in server commands. So ./gradlew "ofbiz --start" will not work because of the space between "ofbiz" and "--start" and that's why I created a JIRA for this issue [1]. I'm not sure what is the best solution, one idea that came to me is perhaps to pass the args to a string. So for example: ./gradlew ofbiz -Pcmd1="--load-data readers=seed" ofbiz -Pcmd2="--start --portoffset=1" Maybe another option is to just run one "ofbiz" task and then pass multiple commands each in a project paramter -Pcmd1= -Pcmd2= -Pcmd3= ... Another option is to hard wire all commands like we did back in Ant days. I'm not sure what is the best solution there, and I don't mean to hijack this thread, but one thing depends on another thing. Should we start a new thread for that? Collect ideas from the community? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9972 On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Michael Brohl wrote: > Because OpenJDK is the base for the Oracle JDK and Oracle is working on Open > JDK, I assume we will have the same problems. It can also be that the two > will be one product soon. Why should Oracle support Open JDK with long term > updates for free? > > I did not find a clear roadmap for Open JDK so it's unclear to me how long > the versions will be supported. > > I think Linux distributions will follow the LTS release cycle also, because > of the same reasons. Here's a statement for Red Hat: > https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013 (at the bottom). > > Most sources of information describe the Open JDK as a reference > implementation which is less stable than the Oracle JDK. > > Personally, I have almost no experience using Open JDK in productive, > professional environments. There were problems years ago which I do not > remember exactly and we use Oracle JDK since then. > > I think we should support Oracle JDK because professional users most likely > will use it and it would be a bad sign if OFBiz shows no official support > for it. > > I also don't like the release model but the costs are moderate and using the > LTS version, there is no headache feature wise. Java 11 LTS will be stable > until 2023 or 2026 if you choose the extended subscription. Lots of time to > prepare for the next LTS version... > > Best regards, > > Michael Brohl > ecomify GmbH > www.ecomify.de > > > Am 28.07.18 um 10:06 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: > >> I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think >> I >> really dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headache >> involved. >> >> Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problems >> with OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugin but I >> cannot recall any serious issues. >> >> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl >> wrote: >> >>> Hi devs, >>> >>> a quick heads up for this topic. >>> >>> After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I think >>> that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe for an >>> LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few users will >>> go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update - test - go live" >>> circle for free Java versions. >>> >>> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it. >>> >>> The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that >>> it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also. >>> >>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11. >>> We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. >>> >>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. >>> >>> What do people think? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Michael Brohl >>> ecomify GmbH >>> www.ecomify.de >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> >>> >>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html >>> >>> [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Michael Brohl >>> Geschäftsführer >>> >>> Fon +49 521 448 157-91 >>> Fax +49 521 448 157-99 >>> Mobil+49 160 3664918 >>> Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl >>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl >>> >>> Company and Management Headquarters: >>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland >>> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de >>> >>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683 >>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl >>> >>> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl: Hi devs, this is just an initial information and dicussion starter to make everyone aware of this: the Oracle Java release model is changing from a feature based to a time based model [1]. One major drawback is that there will be no
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Because OpenJDK is the base for the Oracle JDK and Oracle is working on Open JDK, I assume we will have the same problems. It can also be that the two will be one product soon. Why should Oracle support Open JDK with long term updates for free? I did not find a clear roadmap for Open JDK so it's unclear to me how long the versions will be supported. I think Linux distributions will follow the LTS release cycle also, because of the same reasons. Here's a statement for Red Hat: https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013 (at the bottom). Most sources of information describe the Open JDK as a reference implementation which is less stable than the Oracle JDK. Personally, I have almost no experience using Open JDK in productive, professional environments. There were problems years ago which I do not remember exactly and we use Oracle JDK since then. I think we should support Oracle JDK because professional users most likely will use it and it would be a bad sign if OFBiz shows no official support for it. I also don't like the release model but the costs are moderate and using the LTS version, there is no headache feature wise. Java 11 LTS will be stable until 2023 or 2026 if you choose the extended subscription. Lots of time to prepare for the next LTS version... Best regards, Michael Brohl ecomify GmbH www.ecomify.de Am 28.07.18 um 10:06 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think I really dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headache involved. Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problems with OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugin but I cannot recall any serious issues. On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl wrote: Hi devs, a quick heads up for this topic. After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I think that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe for an LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few users will go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update - test - go live" circle for free Java versions. Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it. The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also. I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. What do people think? Best regards, Michael Brohl ecomify GmbH www.ecomify.de [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/ Michael Brohl Geschäftsführer Fon +49 521 448 157-91 Fax +49 521 448 157-99 Mobil+49 160 3664918 Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl Company and Management Headquarters: ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683 Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl: Hi devs, this is just an initial information and dicussion starter to make everyone aware of this: the Oracle Java release model is changing from a feature based to a time based model [1]. One major drawback is that there will be no more public patch releases for older versions once a new release is published, if I understand correctly. We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe release more often. We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial support? I'm not sure. What do you think? Best regards, Michael [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think I really dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headache involved. Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problems with OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugin but I cannot recall any serious issues. On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl wrote: > Hi devs, > > a quick heads up for this topic. > > After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I think > that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe for an > LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few users will > go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update - test - go live" > circle for free Java versions. > > Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it. > > The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that > it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also. > > I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11. > We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. > > Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. > > What do people think? > > Best regards, > > Michael Brohl > ecomify GmbH > www.ecomify.de > > > [1] > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html > > [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/ > > > > > Michael Brohl > Geschäftsführer > > Fon +49 521 448 157-91 > Fax +49 521 448 157-99 > Mobil+49 160 3664918 > Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl > LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl > > Company and Management Headquarters: > ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland > Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de > > Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683 > Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl > > Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl: > > Hi devs, > > > > this is just an initial information and dicussion starter to make > > everyone aware of this: > > > > the Oracle Java release model is changing from a feature based to a > > time based model [1]. One major drawback is that there will be no more > > public patch releases for older versions once a new release is > > published, if I understand correctly. > > > > We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support > > for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date > > according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to > > early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe > > release more often. > > > > We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the > > current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial > > support? I'm not sure. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Best regards, > > > > Michael > > > > [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ > > > > > > > > >
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Hi devs, a quick heads up for this topic. After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I think that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe for an LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few users will go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update - test - go live" circle for free Java versions. Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it. The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also. I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it. Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11. What do people think? Best regards, Michael Brohl ecomify GmbH www.ecomify.de [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/ Michael Brohl Geschäftsführer Fon +49 521 448 157-91 Fax +49 521 448 157-99 Mobil+49 160 3664918 Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl Company and Management Headquarters: ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683 Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl: Hi devs, this is just an initial information and dicussion starter to make everyone aware of this: the Oracle Java release model is changing from a feature based to a time based model [1]. One major drawback is that there will be no more public patch releases for older versions once a new release is published, if I understand correctly. We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe release more often. We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial support? I'm not sure. What do you think? Best regards, Michael [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
