Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> 1) I proposed initially jdk 1.6 move because of the DBCP issue. I agree
> now with Scott. Maybe we can wait to be in a situation that
> really forces us to move ahead. It's simply pragmatic: why working on an
> issue that does not exist yet? Even if we are sure we will
> cross them.

I'm working on a major UtilCache update, one that takes full advantage
of java.util.concurrent, non-blocking, and java 1.6.  I've got it
mostly ready to go, just working on test cases(which will take a bit,
as threaded test cases are complex).

> 3) On the Workflow/Shark components issue, we could have the same
> attitude. We crossed an issue we know that will come again. Scott
> proposed to handle it (the problems comes from generating Shark Javadoc,
> we can disable it -Workflow too - as we currently disable
> Shark and Workflow compilations). Moreover I suggested to move them in a
> new deprecated directories just under root but disconnected
> from current work. We would isolate there as well all deprecated
> components in the future. There they will be easy to spot. And if we put
> special directions on how to use them (like we have currently in
> OPTIONNAL_LIBRARIES for Shark) we would not have to care about them
> anymore. If someone want to use/improve them: fell free...

If no one takes ownership of the shark code, then we shouldn't keep it
in the project.

For those parts of ofbiz that require external,
non-apache-redistributable libraries, if no one is available to keep
the code working, then the burden becomes too high.

> Birt will be integrated soon, I think we all agree. For now, as Scott
> said, licence issues are a no no.

Birt should have never been added as a branch into the primary, main,
central, shared repository.  It should have been done external, until
these issues were resolved.  Any large, external project with it's own
set of required libraries should be done much more carefully.
Licensing issues need to be fixed *before* they are added into svn
history, which is maintained until the end of time.

Reply via email to