Hi Michael, All All good points, thank you for your thoughts. So a solution that I proposed in jira to easily manage and maintain our official plugins is to have a gradle task named for example pullPluginSourceAll which pulls all the plugins in one shot for testing and development purposes. Maybe we can also add logic in this task so that it updates already downloaded plugins.
I'm sure there are other good ideas as well. My point of emphasis is to Simply keep the two projects clearly separated, and to avoid relying directly on tools not embedded within the framework like subversion. On Feb 13, 2017 12:08 AM, "Michael Brohl" <michael.br...@ecomify.de> wrote: > Hi, > > first of all: great work and many thanks to Taher, Jacques and Deepak for > their efforts on the repository separation this weekend. > > I think we should provide processes and support for the following cases: > > 1. separated development of the framework and core applications without > forced embedding of the plugins > > 2. separated development of the plugins with the support to embed the > framework part in the development environment > > 3. combined development of both framework and plugins. > > I think we'll need convenience tools/processes/support for these > combinations because we should make contributions for and use of framework > + plugins as easy as possible without forcing the entanglement of the > different projects. > > As far as I understand forced use of svn:externals is contra productive > because it prevents the separation. We should instead describe the > mechanism and provide a set of svn:externals files for all users who want > to use it. Maybe also a gradle task which generates the needed file(s) for > convenience. > > I think we cannot only rely on the pull plugin mechanism because combined > development needs to have framework and plugins in the IDE under version > control. > > Users and developers should have a choice (and low hurdles to contribute), > on the other hand we should keep it lean and simple per default. > > Not sure if I could make my viewpoint clear enough, I'm currently too > tired to concentrate on better words :-) > > Best regards, > > Michael > > > Am 12.02.17 um 20:59 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: > >> Hi Sharan, >> >> I think this is not the topic under discussion, and since it seems vague >> to >> you I will try to clarify: >> >> The question now that we split framework and plugins is how to combine >> them. The discussion so far between myself and Jacques is as follows: >> - Jacques wants to use svn:externals so that subversion pulls all the >> plugins into the framework and keep everything as is (testing, builds, >> etc) >> the way they were. >> - My position is that we should use gradle to pull the plugins we need >> without reliance on Subversion or any other tool and to treat the two >> projects as two separate projects. >> >> Both reasons / concerns from me and Jacques are expressed by reading the >> history of this thread (that partly exists in another thread for which >> Deepak contributed his opinion). >> >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Sharan Foga <sha...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Hi All >>> >>> I'm not exactly completely sure what this discussion is all about. The >>> title talks about svn and Gradle but questions in the thread seem to >>> about >>> something different. If it is as important as you say then we need to >>> make >>> sure that everyone understands exactly what this means. >>> >>> Are you saying that because of the framework / plugin split then >>> committers will work only on the framework? If so, then remember that it >>> was our contributors and committers that put the 'plugins' into OFBiz in >>> the first place which means that people who are interested in developing >>> a >>> particular functionality further can do it without worrying about or >>> breaking the framework. >>> >>> From my side I know that we also have some OFBiz application >>> documentation >>> that is sitting in docbook inside OFBiz I think would be better >>> implemented >>> as a plugin. It would be good to be able to work on and test this >>> separately. >>> >>> I apologise if I've misunderstood this thread but as I say - it's not >>> very >>> clear what it is all about. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Sharan >>> >>> On 2017-02-12 13:55 (+0100), Jacques Le Roux < >>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Taher, >>>> >>>> I create a clean new thread to have it more prominent. >>>> >>>> This is really what needs to be discussed indeed. >>>> >>>> Are we sure that's what we want for plugins? >>>> >>>> Will they not be disregarded by committers? >>>> >>>> Will plugins follow the framework trend? >>>> >>>> This is a very important community decision. >>>> I hope everybody will (try to) understand the consequences and >>>> >>> participate to this discussion, before it will be too late... >>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 12/02/2017 � 13:32, Taher Alkhateeb a �crit : >>>> >>>>> Let's take a look at the big picture for a moment before we decide. We >>>>> >>>> have >>> >>>> broken OFBiz into essentially two products: framework and plugins. >>>>> >>>>> Why did we break it up? Why did we go through the trouble of creating >>>>> >>>> two >>> >>>> different repositories? I hope the answer is something like "because >>>>> >>>> it is >>> >>>> too big" or "because it carried a lot of non-essential functionality >>>>> >>>> around" >>> >>>> So breaking up the project brings the advantage of not having to _worry >>>>> about everything_ on each and every commit. These are two projects >>>>> >>>> with two >>> >>>> release cycles and they don't need to be developed together >>>>> >>>> simultaneously. >>> >>>> People can specialize and focus on different areas. >>>>> >>>>> The whole idea of breaking the system up and then using gradle's >>>>> >>>> plugin API >>> >>>> for OFBiz is to remove the coupling between the two projects. If we >>>>> introduce svn externals then all we achieve is create two repositories >>>>> only to merge them again. Why! that's pointless! >>>>> >>>>> Two products means two buildbot scripts, two releases, two development >>>>> cycles, two different things! >>>>> >>>>> So to achieve true separation and decoupling, I suggest to avoid any >>>>> >>>> hacks >>> >>>> like svn externals. >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi All, >>>>>> >>>>>> This discussion already happened at OFBIZ-9182, but only between >>>>>> >>>>> Taher, >>> >>>> Nicolas and I. >>>>>> >>>>>> The question is simple, below reflects it, and the subject summarises >>>>>> >>>>> it. >>> >>>> So what are your thoughts and opinions? >>>>>> >>>>>> Also when answering I guess we can remove '(was Re: Proposal to >>>>>> >>>>> create a >>> >>>> separate svn repository for the OFBiz official plugins)' from the >>>>>> >>>>> subject >>> >>>> (I was just "lazy" here) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 12/02/2017 � 11:22, Jacques Le Roux a �crit : >>>>>> >>>>>> Sincerely I hardly see the benefit, but I see the disadvantages when >>>>>>> >>>>>> I >>> >>>> remember what happened with R13.07. I mean how and by who will be >>>>>>> maintained the OOTB plugins? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think this should be more discussed, and maybe voted, here >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 12/02/2017 � 11:18, Deepak Dixit a �crit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We can add gradle task to pull all plugins from remote. As we are >>>>>>>> de-coupling plugins from core so I think its good idea to keep them >>>>>>>> separate. If any committer or developer want he can use gradle task >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> for >>> >>>> the >>>>>>>> same. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Deepak Dixit >>>>>>>> www.hotwaxsystems.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes this is the idea, why should we not? How else committers will >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> easily >>> >>>> maintain the plugins? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Le 12/02/2017 � 10:25, Deepak Dixit a �crit : >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think if wesvn:external on trunk, then it will always checkout >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the >>> >>>> plugins with trunk >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Deepak Dixit >>>>>>>>>> www.hotwaxsystems.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Deepak Dixit < >>>>>>>>>> deepak.di...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> > >
