Hi all,
First to clarify things, OFBiz-france association goal is to promote
Apache OFBiz into french speaking audience by giving references
(information, classifications and links) to extensions (documentations,
addons, patchs or packaged solution), maybe hosting some high quality
not contributable extensions.
Helping extensions' owner improving their quality to convert its into
OFBiz contribution if possible, or referencing them for easy sharing of
classified solutions.
Creating a tool integrated into Apache OFBiz too manage and share anyone
devs by implementing a new extension manager
(http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/goxbqcgurpoy2yfp?q=ofbiz-fr without
success for now :) )
Nereide Leverage of addon solutions, like you introduce is just an
illustration of this process. Nereide as a member of the association
will give as example some instance of extensions, hoping that other
contribution and contributor will come (and be welcome).
I think that this git solution of *creating a consortium [...]* is quite
different (even if i do not understand all the ins and out of it) and
might be more comparable to ofbizextra effort, to give the ability for
everyone to develop and share using a dedicated tool.
And because everything which is committed into Apache OFBiz project has
to be validated, and development within Integrators Projects do not have
the same rythm/pace, ofbizextra was created to store and share
unfinished/specific/not ready quality wise devs and this has to be out
of Apache OFBiz.
My personal opinion is (i'm not a git user), that SVN seems quite
sufficient for Apache OFBiz needs. I remind me reading that there is
already a git repository of the trunk branch so, if true, it can be used
by contributor too make their devs using it. I'm not relevent evaluating
git usage, but i do not feel a real problem using SVN.
In every case, contribution will have to be given within Jira to get
into the project.
Best Regards
Gil
On 21/04/2015 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.
