Hi Jacques, See my comment that i put in the JIRA on 22/Oct/09 07:28 AM. Leaving out the payment segment is *not* in the patch... So you don't have to worry about that.
But you are right. Reviewing patches is always good. If people are reviewing it, that's ok. And I expect to hear/read from them soon with their comments/plan of action. However, we both (and others) agree that the SFA module needs more than some love to become a best in class solution. We have a ancient document that outlines in a high level where the application should go. But are the stated requirements still valid? And are these then complete? And... Requirements are not a devleopment roadmap. Meaning that they are the input for a road to go. Functional design/technical design detail that more. That why JIRA items are created, I guess. I can submit my insights and deliver patches. My insights are yust one point of view and may be disregarded by project members. I am happy with that. It are just opinions. But when I submit patches to improve OfBIZ for the greater good of OfBiz I expect something to be done with them in a timely fashion. If not handled that way I could easily refrain from helping and go about my way.... If there are constraints regarding time available from people involved in handling submitted patches I would suggest get more involvement on that level. Regards, Pierre 2009/10/27 Jacques Le Roux (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3066?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12770466#action_12770466] > > Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-3066: > ---------------------------------------- > > Certainly, but at short term on my side it mostly depends on prospect > answer... > And I'd far prefer to have (even a fast) review by the person or group who > did the 1st implementation than have to revert it because they don't agree > (I think mostly about the payment method thing, but there are maybe others) > > > >
