Le 21/01/2020 à 00:36, Mathieu Lirzin a écrit :
Hello,
Taher Alkhateeb <slidingfilame...@gmail.com> writes:
While working on all the above, I never faced major obstacles. But the
reason that I did not is I always made a complete, well written
argument about what I'm trying to implement. I always ask for a pair
of eyes to look at my code and give me feedback, and I always engage
with the community. In my opinion, disagreements made me do some of
the best pieces of code because I learn and grow from other people's
input.
That sounds a lot like a polite way to suggest that I did not engage
properly with the community. I have done my best to get people involved
while acknowledging the need to move relatively fast which IMO is
justified by the abyssal technical debt of OFBiz.
The boundary of a public API does not necessarily need to be agreed
upon RIGHT NOW!. I don't think the best way to move forward is to
enforce agreeing on what we should done before hand.
Instead of setting rules and boundaries on what should and should not
be done, I recommend instead collaborating on all work, one piece at a
time. As I said, I've worked on very large issues indeed and had no
problem working it with others and making it eventually to the code
base.
So whenever there is a disagreement or differing points of view, why
not start a new thread specific to that topic and work it out.
Everybody wants the best for the project, and communication is the key
to moving us forward IMHO.
I agree that communication is important as long as it enables people to
move forward, currently we are blocked. If you look at the initial
discussion, you will see that this is precisely a deadlock in a *thread
specific* conversation between Michael and me that lead to this general
question.
This specific discussion is simply unsolvable because everybody is
basing their arguments on undocumented assumptions regarding what needs
to be preserved, what needs to be superseded, how things are supposed to
be done, etc. This is basically a sterile “you broke my business
specific extension” vs “I want to improve the framework” debate where
both perspective can be seen as legitimate but are fundamentally
incompatible with each other in practice.
To recap the discussion, it appears that most people that have responded
to my call for defining/documenting what is part of OFBiz public API
feel this would be an unnecessary and counter-productive action and that
case by case discussions can be a more valuable substitute.
As a consequence I think we can close the subject now.
Thanks to everyone who took some of their time to participate.
Hi Mathieu,
Sorry I disagree, I for one would very like to have what you expressed at
https://s.apache.org/5gryr in OFBiz in future
We can agree to disagree with Michael, and have it in trunk. As I said already,
it would let several years for users (like Michael) to adjust.
Of course for that we need a vote and Michael not to veto this change on trunk
with solid arguments.
Else, seeing yours and Samuel's recent framework efforts compared to the rest of the community, I fear the future of OFBiz is not bright. Apart if we
consider the UI as the most important, which I don't...
I'm ready to engage a vote if you agree with me
Thanks
Jacques
