Simply because I read that in the document Bruno "sent" us and I was not aware
of all details.
So I though maybe some other commitets were not and a summary (on this subject)
could not hurt.
Jacques
From: "Scott Gray" <scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com>
Why would you even bring this up here? No one is talking about commits and
definitely no one is talking about reverts.
Regards
Scott
On 12/03/2010, at 2:53 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Anyway a sole -1 is enough for reverting code without explanations
Needs 3 +1 (and more + than -) for a release.
These are Apache rules (inherited from HTTPD project) as it's well explained in
the release management document Bruno gave a link)
Jacques
From: "Bilgin Ibryam" <bibr...@gmail.com>
Scott Gray wrote:
Hi Hans,
I would recommend using the custRequestItem for the story, the implementation can be simple enough by using a service to create
the header and item in a single call and a view entity could could them back to you as a single record. Conceptually what you
really have is a customer request with a single item.
I don't like the idea of modifying the data model when it is already quite
capable of meeting your needs.
Regards,
Scott
Agreed with Scott. Having two places for the same information will be confusing/redundant and such a change should not go to
ofbiz svn in that case.
Bilgin
