The others participating in this project ( with and without customers are of no importance?
Regards, Pierre Sent from my iPhone > On 23 okt. 2014, at 18:04, Ron Wheeler <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> wrote: > >> On 23/10/2014 11:33 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >> Le 23/10/2014 17:11, Ron Wheeler a écrit : >>> On 23/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>> >>>> Le 23/10/2014 15:01, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : >>>>> On Oct 23, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Jacques Le Roux >>>>> <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I agree about the idea, but this applies only to releases or checked out >>>>>> code. Because there are no ways for users to enable/disable a component >>>>>> in demos, moreover demos are shared. >>>>> Could you please explain the above sentence? I don't understand the >>>>> meaning of it. >>>> >>>> Your idea of disabling some specialpurpose component can't be applied in >>>> R13.07 demo until we decide which component should be disabled in trunk. >>>> In the meantime we should keep the current state (ie all specialpurpose >>>> components present in trunk should be available in R13.07 demo) >>> >>> If they are in the demo they should be in the release. >> >> Actually the specialpurpose components are in the R13.07 demos because they >> can be there. But they are not maintained in the R13.07 branch (but >> ecommerce) only in trunk. >> >>> As you can guess, I am troubled about the relation between releases and the >>> trunk and demos in OFBiz. >> >> Would you prefer to not have the specialpurpose components in R13.07 demo? >> >>> It is a bit odd and certainly goes against most product release strategies >>> wherein the current release is the recommended download and carries >>> whatever warranty that the project offers in terms of testing and rapidity >>> of bug fixes and the trunk is usually called something that >>> includes"nightly build" and "unstable" in the name and comes with no >>> warranty and a warning about using it at your own risk. >>> >>> Demos should be of the latest release and should be stable and have a fixed >>> functionality that can be documented in the wiki and marketing pages. >> >> They are, just that they use the branch instead of the packaged releases. >> For R13.07 (current stable) there is an exception, because I thought it was >> better to have the specialpurpose components available. This is what Jacopo >> contests >> >>> It could be maintained by the documentation team once it is set up since it >>> should not require any technical skills to keep working and fed with demo >>> data. >>> >>> >>> If the developers need a test site based on the nightly build, they should >>> be free to set up as many combinations of configurations as they require >>> and can support to be sure that the trunk still works but this should not >>> be the public demo or even be called a "demo". >> >> It's also, there are no official mention of the trunk demo, it's only a >> developers thing. >> >>> >>> Of course, this only works if a release is actually a Release and the team >>> stands behind it and uses it when establishing new customers. >> >> We have no customers, only users > > The PMC members have the customers to whom I was referring. > >> >> Jacques >> >>> >>> Does anyone have an opinion about the gap between 13.07.01 and what the >>> main SI companies are getting from using the trunk instead. >>> Would a monthly release pattern reduce this gap to a point where it would >>> be possible to use the official Release as the actual release? >>> >>>> >>>> I hope it's more clear >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Jacopo > > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >
