Wouldn't that be better served by the demo OFBiz?
Jonathon
Scott Gray wrote:
I don't think the download is intended to be a replacement for a checkout
but more a simple download for a complete newbie to do an initial
evaluation, if they like what they see then they can figure out svn.
Regards
Scott
On 22/10/2007, Jonathon -- Improov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Having both will be good.
The SVN workspace download is for those who want to easily upgrade/update
in future. This is
needed even by newbies who may need to conveniently pull in critical
updates, esp if they're
playing with trunk.
The non-SVN download (generated by svn export) is for those who do not
intend to do any
incremental updates in future. That means they'll have to re-download a
whole bunch for future
versions.
Jonathon
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Why not both ? They have different goals. We may recommend good open
source free tools. On Windows I would recommend 7-zip !
Jacques
De : "Jacopo Cappellato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi Jonathon,
Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
Jacques is right.
The best way was already suggested by the creator of this thread. And
that is to publish a tarball of a SVN workspace. Downloaders will need
to install SVN, of course.
I'm not sure if the 'tarball' of a complete svn workspace (i.e. "svn
checkout" instead of "svn export") is good idea, at least as the
primary
download file:
1) the file is bigger
2) in the past, I had some problems in extracting big files (i.e. an
Opentaps tarball) containing svn folders: the process was really very
slow (the number of files to extract is huge when you include svn
folders); this was probably caused by a bad unzip software (or bad
hardware) but we should consider this
Jacopo
And when we have time or bandwidth, we can also publish a non-SVN
version (generated with svn export).
I think it's nice (as a new OFBiz user) to be guided or prompted to
use
SVN. Version control concepts are curiously sorely lacking even among
many IT professionals.
Jonathon
Adam Heath wrote:
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Not everybody use Debian
This is true; We have use for rpms, as a few of our clients host
their
own hardware/software, and they use rpm-based systems. However, we
have
no experience creating rpm packages, so haven't done this.
The debian packaging itself could be used as a basis for other
packaging
systems. I've already committed all the patches I had to do to make
it
work in debian.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1084 - Release Date: 10/21/2007 3:09 PM
