On 24/10/2014 3:58 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Le 24/10/2014 00:02, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
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?
If they are not in the 13.07.01 release it creates a bit of a
mismatch between the demo and what you actually get.
Otherwise I would have no problem.
It's also Jacopo's opinion, I don't know if it's for the same reason.
My proposed alternative is to keep only the ones which will be enabled
in the trunk and explain somewhere (on the site main page?) why we do
that and how to do the same using svn external or direct check out
from trunk.
The idea is it's a bit didactic on how to use the specialpurpose
components in future releases. Except if we change our POV and keep
the enabled ones in releases in future, which could be even simpler...
Is there an architectural overview describing the relationship between
the core functionality and the "supported" components?
Is there a difference between "available" and "enabled" that would be
clear to a new user?
I don't understand the technical details but I gather that there is a
potential for conflict between the components.
Has there been any guidelines about how to describe the conflict issue
to a system administrator so that modules are installed in the "right"
sequence to end up with a working system?
Has there been any discussion about how developers should construct
components so that their potential for interference is reduced and is
done in a consistent way.
Are there hooks that allow administrators to configure sets of
components to work the way that they should or to allow developers of
components to write components that interact with the core functionality
in a safe way? For example, a way to allow a system administrator to
chose between 2 data entry screens depending on what data needs to be
collected( if you enable component B, then you need to use order-entry
screen "B" rather than the core screen and if you do, the core order
processing will still work where it does not require or track the extra
data that screen "B" collects .
Ron
I guess at some point the disabled specialpurpose components in trunk
will end in Attic.
Jacques
Ron
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
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
