Sharing those improvements as patches attached to JIRA issues is a way better mechanism for exposure and review than through the distributed and competing search/find tools of today (Google et all) into all the distributed repositories or forks.
Best regards, Pierre. Op dinsdag 21 april 2015 heeft Sharan Foga <sharan.f...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven: > Hi All > > I've been looking at some of what OFBiz France has done regarding addons > for OFBiz . I think there are a lot of useful things that have been > contributed by the community in general (not only OFBiz France) that are > either sitting in forks or addons or just in Jira that haven't really been > visible to the community. > > Making them visible gives the community more freedom and choice - whatever > tool is used. > > Thanks > Sharan > > > > On 21.4.2015 12:19, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > >> >> Le 21/04/2015 12:02, David E. Jones a écrit : >> >>> On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Quoting: >>>> >>>> We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the >>>> project >>>> does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a >>>> consortium of >>>> organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the >>>> master >>>> branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will, >>>> effectively, >>>> result in a distributed master repository image. >>>> >>>> Thanks Ean for the position of *Brainfood* in this position. It comes >>>> across as 'Do it our way, or else'. You are free to make such statements >>>> and when followed through there will be consequences. For all >>>> participating >>>> in this project. One I can see standing out clearly is: no more >>>> participation in/contribution from the employees of Brainfood and from >>>> the >>>> other companies in that consortium back into the project. >>>> >>> That's not at all what I get from Ean's comments. The magic of a >>> community-driven project is that people can collaborate on anything they >>> want, within the scope of the main project or as side projects. If the main >>> project doesn't provide something desired, then it is perfectly appropriate >>> for others to collaborate on that... better than doing it totally isolated. >>> >>> What Ean is talking about ties in with the general idea of distributed >>> source management and distributed development. The general idea is that >>> there may be many forks of the main source repo, potentially with various >>> branches for different improvements and changes. These are generally made >>> available publicly, like public GitHub forks of other public repositories >>> (though with git they can be hosted anywhere). >>> >>> Those who make changes can request that particular changes be pulled >>> into upstream repositories and then those who maintain the upstream repos >>> (or the main project repo if it bubbles up that high) can review them and >>> pull the changes if desired. Those who maintain upstream repos can also >>> look around for useful changes in forked repos and pull them in as desired. >>> Others who run their own forks can pull in changes from peer repositories >>> too. >>> >>> It may seem like chaos to have forks and changes spread all over the >>> place... but that isn't caused by the distributed source management >>> approach, it's just made visible and clear by the approach. Right now this >>> exists on a large scale for OFBiz, tons of forks and changes in them, but >>> they are mostly not visible or publicly available so there is no way for >>> OFBiz committers to pull changes from other repos... they basically have to >>> be extracted into a patch file and submitted through a Jira issue. >>> >>> In other words, the chaos exists and the distributed source management >>> enabled by git just makes it easier to track it all and tame it a bit. >>> >>> On a side note, this is one of the reasons I have concerns about making >>> Moqui and related projects part of the ASF: the ASF community approach >>> doesn't fit very well with this distributed source management model (pull >>> requests are discouraged, all contributions should go through Jira >>> issues... though I don't know that this is a strict policy). >>> >>> -David >>> >> >> Interesting David, it can be compared to the OFBiz-France association >> effort to leverage the Nereides addons and addons manager. I let aside the >> licenses issues, as long as it's no part of a released package there are no >> problems. >> What do you think OFBiz-France members? >> >> Jacques >> >> >>> If that is going to happen, I will say: 'I thank you for all the >>>> contributions you did to the project'. And I will check in my >>>> sentiments at >>>> the door. I do hope that if you do you also resign totally from this >>>> project. >>>> >>>> >>>> I rather have the community comes to its decision based on sound/valid >>>> arguments, not (veiled) threats. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Ean Schuessler <e...@brainfood.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> >>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> >>>>>> Subject: Re: move to git. >>>>>> Like Adrian and mostly for the same reasons, I don't believe we need >>>>>> Git. >>>>>> >>>>>> But there is one other major reason which has already been discussed >>>>>> in >>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>> >>>>>> other common ASF MLs. As Taher exulted, it's possible to create local >>>>>> branches. So people are able to do a lot of work alone without >>>>>> >>>>> exchanging before >>>>> >>>>>> committing or submitting. It will certainly not help to have this >>>>>> possibility. >>>>>> >>>>> I disagree. It is useful in many situations for OFBiz developers to >>>>> create >>>>> a >>>>> local repository that is not globally shared. Some customers may even >>>>> require >>>>> such a situation for security or legal reasons. >>>>> >>>>> Remember our recent discussion on the lack or core commits reviews. >>>>>> With Git you end with commits bursts or big patches and it's then >>>>>> hard to review and too late to share ideas. >>>>>> >>>>>> So unlike Adrian, I'm even strongly against it. I will not hesitate to >>>>>> >>>>> use a -1 >>>>> >>>>>> if necessary! >>>>>> >>>>> We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the >>>>> project >>>>> does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a >>>>> consortium of >>>>> organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the >>>>> master >>>>> branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will, >>>>> effectively, >>>>> result in a distributed master repository image. >>>>> >>>>> If anyone else is interested in such an arrangement please feel free to >>>>> speak >>>>> up and we can begin the planning process. >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> > -- Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com
