Le 15/04/2018 à 14:30, Mathieu Lirzin a écrit :
Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> writes:
Let me clarify my position. I'm not strictly against this change. I
don't fear a such OOTB change, after all it's only name change, isn't
? And what you mentioned below Suraj is the right way to go. Obviously
the concern is for custom projects.
Though I'm not directly concerned (I have no current direct
responsibilities on custom projects which could be impacted) I can
foresee issues on custom projects even if we provide tests to cover
the change as Rajesh rightly suggested. Because tests can't guarantee
to reveal issues in custom code, so people might overlook when
migrating. We have no ideas of what users do in their project, it can
be surprising sometimes. So I'd like to have more opinions and
especially ideas of people concerned. I'm not sure we will get them in
dev ML. So I think we should ask on user ML. Even if I guess all users
are not reading all messages on user ML, at least we would have done
our best.
It's free software so you never know who is going to be impacted, even
if you ask on a user ML. :-)
IIUC the question is to know if changing an entity name is an acceptable
breaking change and how it should be handled. Is there a way to
deprecate the old entity name, while introducing the new one?
Yes of course this exists, OFBiz is a serious software ;)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/General+Entity+Overview#GeneralEntityOverview-DeprecatedEntities
There is a link from
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Revisions+Requiring+Data+Migration+-+upgrade+ofbiz
Actually it's now mostly about getting a (possibly lazy, obviously not in this
case) consensus, and if really needed a vote
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
http://theapacheway.com/consensus/
Jacques
