Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Le 21/03/2017 à 15:32, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : OK I have finally done it. We have now 2 new Buildbot builders ofbiz-trunk-framework-plugins runs the test and that's all ofbiz-trunk-framework runs the build and creates the ofbiz-trunk-framework snapshot ofbiz-trunk-plugins is not new, it

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

OK I have finally done it. We have now 2 new Buildbot builders ofbiz-trunk-framework-plugins runs the test and that's all ofbiz-trunk-framework runs the build and creates the ofbiz-trunk-framework snapshot ofbiz-trunk-plugins is not new, it only creates the ofbiz-trunk-plugins snapshot The

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Taher, I got your point and you are right. Now I think all the community should focus on decoupling the plugins from the framework. In the meantime I still think it's no point running the ofbiz-framework build on Buildbot Jacques Le 13/03/2017 à 16:51, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : Well

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Michael, Good points, thank you for sharing your thoughts. So the dependencies in the past were just jars that we put in the code base which we cannot do for release purposes. But even if we can, although you have the advantage of stable versions, you will have the disadvantage of manually

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

I agree that themes are different from plugins, providing cross-sectional functionality and I think that we should treat them differently. Regards, Michael Am 12.03.17 um 11:58 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: Hi Pierre, The question we need to answer here is "Can we consider themes as plugins"

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Taher, first of all, thank you very much for your ongoing hard work on this, I really appreciate it. Maybe I'm a little late joining this discussion but I'd like to express one view point which I think is really important to ensure stable production settings. It came to my mind as I read

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

gt;> ofbiz-trunk-plugins builder source >> The rest should not change >> So it would slightly be less pull on resources, and especially we can >> remove the ofbiz-trunk-plugins builder and all related, even the >> ofbiz-trunk-plugins-rat builder. because all would be included in >> ofbiz-trunk-framework-rat (renamed ofbiz-trunk-rat IMO) >> So it would be finally simpler. >> >> WDYT? >> >> Jacques >> -- View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/proposal-actions-to-take-with-plugins-tp4703181p4703235.html Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Well here is exactly what you said: "So, if a plugin changes its dependencies, nothing should change in the main build, so no implications for ofbiz-framework build, right?" And the answer is, no, there _are_ implications which I explained in my previous post. Anyway, I leave it for the

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

I did not say it the same dependencies graph. Anyway I'll also not continue on this, please do as you like and we will see then. If you look at the links (and subtasks) I provided, it's a "bit" more than moving few XML files, notably OFBIZ-9241. And with these links we have no completeness

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

So I'm not going to reply to everything because we both made our points. My reply is mostly for dependencies. Ofbiz + plugins is not just a difference of the plugins dependencies. No you actually get different versions of libraries (up or down) and sometimes even different libraries altogether

Re: Default theme (WAS: [proposal] actions to take with plugins)

s message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Default-theme-WAS-proposal-actions-to-take-with-plugins-tp4703201p4703203.html Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Taher, Inline... Le 13/03/2017 à 12:47, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : Hi Jacques, It seems you might be missing the implications of a full split between the framework and plugins including with buildbot. So I will try to explain why I think it is extremely important to completely separate the

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Jacques, It seems you might be missing the implications of a full split between the framework and plugins including with buildbot. So I will try to explain why I think it is extremely important to completely separate the build process into two unrelated, non-synchronized setups: - First, the

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Taher, Inline following the "Plugins packages?" thread. Le 12/03/2017 à 11:51, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Le 12/03/2017 à 09:38, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : - Create two different buildbot scripts for OFBiz, one for standalone ofbiz-framework and the other for ofbiz-framework +

Re: Default theme (WAS: [proposal] actions to take with plugins)

I agree, this is really a smart way to vote on this subject and still not too complicated like other (sometimes necessarily combined) methods which follow the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method Jacques Le 12/03/2017 à 23:17, Scott Gray a écrit : We seemingly couldn't agree on the

Re: Default theme (WAS: [proposal] actions to take with plugins)

fbiz-plugins. The >>>> second buildbot script would use the pullAllPluginsSource instead of >>>> svn:external for combining the two repositories. >>>> >>>> WDYT? >>>> >>>> [1] https://s.apache.org/5Dv8 - separate plugins in

Default theme (WAS: [proposal] actions to take with plugins)

We seemingly couldn't agree on the best logo either, yet we have only one. I think an instant run-off vote ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting) would probably be the most appropriate way to come to a conclusion, given the large number of themes and relatively small number of

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Pierre, The question we need to answer here is "Can we consider themes as plugins" At the moment I don't think so, because at least one is necessary and we can't really agree on which one it should be (though Flat Grey seems the most complete) So I'd wait for Julien and Nicolas effort to

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hi Taher, First congratulations, it's a great achievement you did with your work on Gradle and the trunk split. Well planned, done and documented. I wish we could always do the same work quality! Even if of course, as always, we crossed some pitfalls on our path. Rest inline... Le

Re: [proposal] actions to take with plugins

I suggest to move theme components from ofbiz-framework to ofbiz-plugins (or another repo). Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Taher

[proposal] actions to take with plugins

Hello everyone, Now that nearly all plugin-API is completed in [5] and [6] and after having various discussions about the plugins system in [1][2][3] and [4], I propose the following action points: - Remove the hot-deploy directory with all references to it. - Create two different buildbot