I remember the discussion about the new security when andy introduced it I remember the push back then. I believe you were the biggest supporter of the security change. this is evident because of the energy you have put into it.
I also agree that the release will be obsolete regardless of the addition of the security, since many will continue to contribute feature and not stop to validate the release candidate. I would really like to see a trend where incomplete or less features than it should be stopped. I can't directly comment on the security since I have not thought about it backwards and forwards. I what I would like to see on these endeavors is a statement that the branch for security is ready to be tested and once that is completed by some of the developers so they can back you then have it merged my 2cents ========================= BJ Freeman http://bjfreeman.elance.com Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man Linkedin <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro> Adrian Crum sent the following on 4/6/2010 5:36 PM: > --- On Tue, 4/6/10, Scott Gray <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 6/04/2010, at 5:18 PM, Adrian Crum >> wrote: >> >>> Adam Heath wrote: >>>> Adrian Crum wrote: >>>>> Anil Patel wrote: >>>>>> I was thinking, Why not other way round. >>>>>> As I understand, we will not be able to >> use execution content features >>>>>> in other parts of Ofbiz in time for 10.4 >> release. If this is the case >>>>>> then additional code in release branch may >> add some new issues but >>>>>> will not add any benefits. Right? >>>>> Have you even looked at the design document or >> the code? >>>> Hmm, why do you have to be so difficult? >> Couldn't you have just >>>> answered the question? Or included a >> reference to the design >>>> document? You know more about this branch >> than others, so why not >>>> share that knowledge? >>> I wasn't being difficult. Anil is saying the security >> redesign won't add any benefits. That tells me he hasn't >> read the design document. >> >> I think you're misinterpreting what he was saying, the no >> benefits is in reference to it being disabled because it >> isn't complete >> >>> I'm a little stunned by all the push back. A year ago >> there was a lot of enthusiasm for this. Now it seems I'm the >> only person interested in seeing it included in the >> project. >> >> Included in the project and included in a release branch to >> be created this month are two very different things. > > Then something has changed. In the past, a release branch was created > regardless of the state of the trunk. In other words, it was released "warts > and all." > > I not trying to be argumentative, but I would like to make one more point. If > we wait until after the release branch, then the branch will be immediately > obsolete. As an example: right after the R4 branch was created we refactored > the UI. For the next two years we had users wishing we would port the trunk's > UI over to R4. > > The new security design is far better than the current one. I have a feeling > history will repeat itself. > > -Adrian > > > > >
