+1
Gil
Le 26/04/2023 à 16:36, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
+1
Jacques
Le 26/04/2023 à 16:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
+1
Jacopo
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 3:11 PM Michael Brohl
wrote:
Hi everyone,
any objections against merging those pr's for framework/plugins in
trunk/release22.01?
I
+1
Jacques
Le 26/04/2023 à 16:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
+1
Jacopo
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 3:11 PM Michael Brohl wrote:
Hi everyone,
any objections against merging those pr's for framework/plugins in
trunk/release22.01?
I think it would be good to test the changes on the demo
+1
Jacopo
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 3:11 PM Michael Brohl wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> any objections against merging those pr's for framework/plugins in
> trunk/release22.01?
>
> I think it would be good to test the changes on the demo servers as well
> to detect possible runtime problems caused
Hi everyone,
any objections against merging those pr's for framework/plugins in
trunk/release22.01?
I think it would be good to test the changes on the demo servers as well
to detect possible runtime problems caused by the changed dependencies.
If there are no objections, I would like to
Hi,
I suggest to start with a new ticket to coordinate the refactoring work
(will you take this into your hands, Wiebke?).
OFBIZ-10226 has another intention which will not solve the overall
problem Wiebke described.
Does the community agree that we'll have to do this work?
Even more, do
Hello,
I like the idea that the developer do not have to sync about which
method to use.
If I understand well what Michael envision, i.e. to use for event a new
GroovyBaseEvent class, and for services/scripts a GroovyBaseScript
class, that both extends a common class for the common code,
Here is the PR for xml rpc related code removal. Please review and let me
know if it looks good.
https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-framework/pull/630/files
Thanks & Regards
--
Deepak Dixit
ofbiz.apache.org
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 11:01 AM Deepak Dixit wrote:
> Hi Jacques,
>
> I agree we should
