one point I never intended the branch be merged into the trunk
it would remain a branch of contributions that users could integrate
back into their own copy.
Hans Bakker sent the following on 7/15/2010 1:59 AM:
Shouldn't we do a proof of concept?
I will volunteer to create and update a new branch for BJ to start and
everyone who would like to contribute. When the people on this branch
say they are ready we can judge what is there and/or provide suggestions
for enhancement.
After general consensus the branch will be merged into the trunk.
Any comments?
Regards,
Hans
On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 18:21 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributors+Branch+proposal
BJ Freeman sent the following on 7/9/2010 11:07 PM:
I am writing a proposal for Contributors branch.
some of the points are:
1)components not continued to be supported in the specialpurpose get
move to the contributors branch till interest is renewed.
this would simplify maintaining the trunk but allow people to pull it
down if they want to work on it.
2)there is no guarantee of the ofbiz community support of the
contributions.
3)people can test the contribution and may vote to include it in the trunk.
4)it gives one place to make sure all contributions are integrated with
the latest trunk and each other without effecting the trunk.
it puzzles me that it is ok open a branch to collorate, but when
opportunity to have a lot of contributions avalible that would spread
Ofbiz acceptance you bulk. under you logic that it can be done elsewhere
why not do the same for Hippo.
I would be interested in your reasons why besides it can be elsewhere.
Scott Gray sent the following on 7/9/2010 10:27 PM:
What need would contributor branches meet that can't already be met
using the likes of sourceforge, google code or github?
Regarding your other statements, at some point Hans you are going to
need to ask yourself why it is mostly only your commits that cause so
much negative discussion. Everyone else seems to work together just
fine for the most part. I'm not saying it's all your fault but you
can't just blame everyone else for these problems and ignore your own
contribution to them.
Regards
Scott
On 10/07/2010, at 2:54 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
I have the same opinion as you BJ, even as a committer it is too much
problem contributing because of the number of technical people in the
PMC which often only judge on technical qualities and making the system
technically as difficult as possible.
The current discussion (not really sure if it is one) between Adrian and
me is a good example.
I think it would be a good idea to have contributor branches. Other PMC
members who would support this?
To be honest i think that you should try to become a committer, i know
why you did not accept in the past, but please reconsider.
Regards,
Hans
On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 18:33 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
my goal has always been to have this ofbiz do this. it has never
been my
intent to have a seperate ofbiz. Nor am I promoting mine.
my problem up to now has been acceptance and resources.
I see the winds changing on acceptance and I have gotten the resources.
if you note I suggest years ago to have contributor branches.
Had that happened I would have contributed to it instead of create
mine.
I see the equivalent of contributor branch happening more like the
Current Hippo branch.
so if someone wants to open a branch I can just submit to, it would be
faster, however i am happy to provide Jiras.
so if the Jiras I put patches in are accepted then the ofbiz will work
the same as the one I have.
Note my first major move to accomplish this
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3852
Scott Gray sent the following on 7/9/2010 5:18 PM:
On 10/07/2010, at 1:06 AM, BJ Freeman wrote:
a product is more of a marketing item
a part is a description of a function
they vary for engineering and manufacturing. Engineering does not
assign a commercial product to the part where manufacture may list
many actual purchase parts that will never be sold individually.
I see in the model book the one I implemented is the alternative
and more extensive model.
Congratulations, where can I download a copy of this BJBiz? Please
try and keep in mind that we are discussing OFBiz in this mailing
list, not your derivative of it.
Scott Gray sent the following on 7/5/2010 5:53 PM:
In OFBiz a Part is a Product, so what is your point?
Regards
Scott
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
On 6/07/2010, at 12:16 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:
I wish to be able to have our engineers link plans to parts
=========================
BJ Freeman<http://bjfreeman.elance.com>
[snip]
BTW your quoting is terrible, I never made the statement below
Scott Gray sent the following on 7/5/2010 5:02 PM:
I wish to be able to have our engineers link plans to parts
--
Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
