To summarize: you were accusing me and pointing your finger to my commit even if my commit doesn't have anything to do with what you are reporting here.
Jacopo On Apr 8, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: > Jacopo, i have a very simple question about a link which always worked: > > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ofbiz-trunk-current.zip > > It was normally shown on this page: > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ > > now it does not work anymore..... > > My point is that this link should be reasonable visible somewhere preferably > on the download page. > > enter "ofbiz trunk current zip" in google and you will see it is used pretty > frequently (3030 times) > (it often also points to > http://build.ofbiz.org/builds/ofbiz-trunk-current.zip and other links) > > If you simply not want do do what i asked for is fine. I now ran out of steam > finally. :-) > > Regards, > Hans > > On 04/08/2012 01:03 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >> On Apr 8, 2012, at 2:35 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: >> >>> Jacopo, >>> >>> You removed the trunk download from the download page which was there from >>> the start without trying to get a consensus. >> What are you talking about? I am shocked about how imprecise but this is >> blatant is ridiculous: what is the removal you are talking about? I simply >> added information about the new release schedule. >> >>> Sure, if everybody thinks that is way to go, than that is it. However i >>> think seeing the the history of OFBiz where the trunk was always very >>> reliable and where problems were always fixed within hours, the trunk is >>> very usable and people selecting the download page should be aware of it. >>> >>> Actually the official Apache pages list this link on the central site. >>> http://projects.apache.org/projects/ofbiz.html >>> So it has nothing to do with Apache policies. >>> >> Hans, are you serious? Or you really don't understand? We have prominent >> links (2 of them) to the svn from the main page and we have a full page >> dedicated to svn instructions: >> http://ofbiz.apache.org/ >> https://cwiki.apache.org/OFBADMIN/ofbiz-source-repository-and-access.html >> >> and no one would ever think to remove them: svn is essential information to >> get new contributions. >> The url to projects.apache.org (that *I* helped to have working on the DOAP >> file) is a good thing to have because it shows a summary of most relevant >> resources for OFBiz, including svn. >> >>> So why not on the OFBiz site? I think it should be there taking the amount >>> of changes that are applied to the trunk, showing the latest version is >>> following the latest internet developments. >>> >>> Further what you are going to do with the 'what is new' page? >> Do you mean the page that was created from a proposal I did a few years ago >> and that now you are using (undisturbed because of the lack of the community >> and PMC oversight on this) to add ads of your company and (unclear) links to >> your sites? >> Here is what I would do there: >> 1) remove all the references to companies and external sites >> 2) keep it as a working document (as we are doing) to prepare official >> "what's new" pages specific for each release branch >> 3) add links to these release branch specific "what's new" pages from the >> README of the branch, from the OFBiz website etc.. >> >>> If people want to try it, where should they find the download link? And the >>> trunk demo, how do they find the download link here too? >> The checkout of source code is not a download and I didn't move the >> instructions: they are still there and there is a prominent link from the >> main page. >> Hans, if you can concentrate it is not that difficult to get: >> 1) download page isfor "officially approved" releases only; the releases are >> served thru the ASF mirrors infrastructure that can *only* serve officially >> voted releases >> 2) the "source code/svn" page is for persons interested in the living >> versions of svn trunk and branches; we have already good information for >> this and in fact very few people ask "where are the source files?" >> >>> So lets do a vote....and see if the removal of the link from the download >>> page was agreed or not. >> Ok, prepare your proposal and then start the vote thread. >> >> Jacopo >> >>> Hans >>> >>> >>> >>> On 04/07/2012 10:30 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>> I am against this, especially if it comes as an order issued by Hans: he >>>> is not in the position of being aggressive or forcing us to do what it >>>> pleases him, he doesn't have the skills, the power, the merit to rule us >>>> (not to mention me); he did it in the past just because we let him do this. >>>> Now, if you and Hans feel that we should add a sentence about the trunk in >>>> the download page, please provide a valid motivation and a valid text, >>>> then start a vote: if the community will vote in favor of it I will be >>>> happy to accept and implement accordingly; otherwise I will not waste more >>>> of my time discussing this just to please Hans. >>>> >>>> Jacopo >>>> >>>> On Apr 7, 2012, at 12:06 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>> >>>>> From: "Jacopo Cappellato"<jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> >>>>>> This is not consensus, it is a compromise. >>>>> Right >>>>> >>>>>> What is the purpose of mentioning that we have also a trunk (obvious) >>>>> To relax each other positions (is that even English? :o). >>>>> Meant for users for are not acquainted with open source but still >>>>> potential OFBiz users >>>>> >>>>>> and what is the text that you would like to add there? >>>>> <<Beside the releases you could also go the bleeding edge way >>>>> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_edge_technology] and check out the >>>>> trunk from OFBiz repository (Subversion)>> >>>>> Depending of the way we prefer to present it, could be also state of art >>>>> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_the_art] because trunk is really >>>>> not that bleeding edge... >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>> >>>>>> On Apr 7, 2012, at 11:06 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe, as a consensus, we can put a word about it and not a link? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Hans Bakker"<mailingl...@antwebsystems.com> >>>>>>>> But Apache does not prohibit it? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> you want to be the best pupil in the Apache school? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I still think this is wrong not to mention it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hans >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 04/07/2012 11:38 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>>>> Thank you Hans, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the download page is intended to end users and we can't include there >>>>>>>>> links to download code that has not been officially approved; this >>>>>>>>> was an issue we had in the past and the ASF asked us to fix the page >>>>>>>>> in the past. >>>>>>>>> For the trunk all the information is here: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/OFBADMIN/ofbiz-source-repository-and-access.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (but that page will have to be converted to html and become "more >>>>>>>>> official"). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2012, at 6:33 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This looks pretty good Jacopo, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> congratulations. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> However no mention of the latest trunk? That should be at least >>>>>>>>>> mentioned. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> Hans >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 04/07/2012 11:27 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> I have now updated the OFBiz download page with a new section >>>>>>>>>>> containing the tentative release schedule for each release: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Congratulations, we have now a plan (simple but effective and >>>>>>>>>>> achievable) and at least users now have a clear vision of the >>>>>>>>>>> lifespan of the release branch they are using and can plan in >>>>>>>>>>> advance the migration of their custom instance. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 27, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Jacopo Cappellato"<jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 26, 2012, at 8:04 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For me also 6 months seems long enough for the 1st official >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. I'm just afraid: will we have not a lot of work to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release so often (relases themself, annunciations, site update >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and especially demos updates) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway it seems we need to do it, maybe at the expense of other >>>>>>>>>>>>>> areas we are working on (Jiras, users support, etc.) >>>>>>>>>>>>> It will take time for sure but working on releases should be the >>>>>>>>>>>>> main goal of a community within the ASF: a release is the only >>>>>>>>>>>>> trusted way to publish the work we do: if we fix a bug but we do >>>>>>>>>>>>> not issue a release the users will not get real benefit. >>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds logical and good to me. It's time to go ahead regarding our >>>>>>>>>>>> way of doing releases. Some time ago, due to our change of way >>>>>>>>>>>> (less using trunk), I was afraid that committers activity would be >>>>>>>>>>>> lower, but it seems to be steady up... so far... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jacques >
