> Diminishing the project to something that Scott would like to result in (a
> project that only works on - in a debatable order of importance - frame
> work elements, base registers as party, order and product, and e-commerce)
> is, in my opinion, a path to the ASF attic.
I completely disagree wi
Hi Ron,
I really hope you are right on your vision for this. What you said makes
sense and needs some testing to affirm it.
Sign me up for the birt component as well as bootstrap for now if this goes
forward!
Taher Alkhateeb
ly encourage the initial suggestion
by Jacopo. I think other suggestions would probably kill any less heavily
maintained components.
Taher Alkhateeb
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Wheeler"
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 7 November, 2014 9:29:05 PM
Subject: Re: How to use Proj
doing the
"real" heavy work.
So for my 2 cents, I still strongly encourage the initial
suggestion by Jacopo. I think other suggestions would probably
kill any less heavily maintained components.
Taher Alkhateeb
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Wheeler" <mailto:rwhee..
Hi All,
In the thread suggestion have been made to move applications (as a
fork/split off) away from the Apache OFBiz project to be maintained by
other people. This is part of an ongoing discussion that started back in
2012 (if I recall correctly). Back then this didn't lead to consensus. Now
it a
p the focus within Apache OFBiz rather than fork the parts into outside
> open source projects which is the current direction.
> >>>
> >>> Ron
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 07/11/2014 2:08 PM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
> >>>> Hi Everyone,
&g
gt; On 07/11/2014 2:08 PM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I do not have a long history with the OFBiz project to understand its
>>>> history, but from the last few years I noticed the following:
>>>>
>>>> - The syst
by Jacopo.
I think other suggestions would probably kill any less heavily maintained
components.
Taher Alkhateeb
- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Wheeler"
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 7 November, 2014 9:29:05 PM
Subject: Re: How to use ProjectMgr in 13.07
I was trying t
Alkhateeb
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Wheeler"
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 7 November, 2014 9:29:05 PM
Subject: Re: How to use ProjectMgr in 13.07
I was trying to find some Apache docs about what is involved.
Separating the SCM controls so that the sub-project
>> commit access and all of that stuff does not make sense when you barely have
>> enough experienced people maintaining the code. I see only a few names over
>> and over who are doing the "real" heavy work.
>>
>> So for my 2 cents, I still strongly encou
ions would probably kill any less heavily maintained
components.
Taher Alkhateeb
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Wheeler"
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 7 November, 2014 9:29:05 PM
Subject: Re: How to use ProjectMgr in 13.07
I was trying to find some Apache docs ab
l strongly encourage the initial suggestion by Jacopo.
I think other suggestions would probably kill any less heavily maintained
components.
Taher Alkhateeb
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Wheeler"
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 7 November, 2014 9:29:05 PM
Sub
I was trying to find some Apache docs about what is involved.
Separating the SCM controls so that the sub-projects can have their own
committers is an important task.
Any idea about what else is required?
In any case, it would be the people who want to support the sub-project
to do the paperwo
I am fine with the idea of encouraging the growth of an ecosystem of *projects*
about OFBiz (not necessarily all within the ASF) but I disagree that they
should be *sub-projects* of OFBiz, mostly because sub-projects just add
complexity within the OFBiz community (with more paperwork required).
Hi All,
I agree that hot-deploy component don't have to be installed with the
core project by default. But in the other hand it could be interesting
to be aware of those projects.
When I read this topics, it seems matching with an extension manager...
French community is working on this exte
I agree with a separate community approach, for these reasons:
The special purpose components started out as little demonstrations of
how OFBiz can be extended to role-specific applications. Since then,
some of those components have expanded into full-featured applications -
so the overhead of
I may be beating a dead horse but what Jacopo is proposing and the
concern that Jacques raised about resources would seem to fit very well
into a sub-project structure.
Split these modules out of the main line into their own OFBiz
sub-projects where they could attract their own resources (commit
I'm all for it, good idea!
Jacques
Le 07/11/2014 13:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
Hi Jacopo,
Well thought and a good suggestion IMHO. Definitely a good middle ground
solution that supports all components and keeps things alive
Taher Alkhateeb
Taher Alkhateeb
On Nov 7, 2014 3:05 PM, "Jacopo C
Hi Jacopo,
Well thought and a good suggestion IMHO. Definitely a good middle ground
solution that supports all components and keeps things alive
Taher Alkhateeb
Taher Alkhateeb
On Nov 7, 2014 3:05 PM, "Jacopo Cappellato" <
jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
> On Nov 7, 2014, at 12:36 PM,
On Nov 7, 2014, at 12:36 PM, Jacques Le Roux
wrote:
> This will no longer work for some components (scrum for instance)
>
> I believe we could be reintroduce some specialpurpose component in next
> release,
There is a difference between including them in a release branch and including
them i
Hi Jacques,
Birt is definitely important for us
Taher Alkhateeb
On Nov 7, 2014 2:40 PM, "Jacques Le Roux"
wrote:
> This will no longer work for some components (scrum for instance)
>
> I believe we could be reintroduce some specialpurpose component in next
> release, as long as they are backed
This will no longer work for some components (scrum for instance)
I believe we could be reintroduce some specialpurpose component in next
release, as long as they are backed by some efforts, come to mind
project manager (Pierre Smits?)
scrum (Hans?)
examples and ext (at least me)
myportal (Frenc
I've never used svn external property, just discovering. That sounds
usefull and i'll try it out !
Thanks for the advice !
Gil
On 20/10/2014 19:08, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
I use svn external in the stable demo, already explained that in the
MLs: see
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/
I use svn external in the stable demo, already explained that in the MLs: see
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/tools/demo-backup/branch13.7-demo.patch?view=markup
You can use the same to keep in sync, only consider projectmgr in your case. Since there is no projectmgr in R13.07 the risk
Hi Jacopo,
Ok then, i will have to re-synchronize new trunk devs each time i'll
feel it necessary. My fear is about incompatibility between 13.07 and
trunk technologies, but that won't happen soon, or i might backport the
evolution into my local environment.
That will do the job !
Thanks
G
Hi Gil,
I would suggest to check it out from the trunk to the hot-deploy folder of
13.07:
cd hot-deploy
svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/projectmgr
Jacopo
On Oct 20, 2014, at 4:11 PM, gil portenseigne
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I don't want to relaunch the debat
Hi all,
I don't want to relaunch the debate around including the projectMgmt
component into the 13.07 release, but i have a question :
What is the best way to import the projectMgr component in my local
13.07 checkout environment, to start using it in a real project and to
contribute on upgr
27 matches
Mail list logo
