Re: Planning for the creation of the new 17.xx branch(es)

[James Yong]

Hi Jacques,

I can help with the cluster implementation and test. Need to plan a time for 
it. Will be a new JIRA issue as you mentioned. 

Regards,
James Yong

On 2017-12-20 16:16, Jacques Le Roux  wrote: 
> That's a good idea James.
> 
> Will you handle the cluster implementation and test?
> 
> BTW it's the only point among those I raised which remains after the 
> suggestion of backporting features on case by case in R17
> 
> Jacques
> 
> 
> Le 20/12/2017 à 06:32, James Yong a écrit :
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Can we commit the code for Tomcat SSO (OFBIZ-10047) but switch the feature 
> > off?
> > Once the Cluster SSO is ready, we can backport to the 17.xx branch with 
> > Tomcat SSO turned on.
> >
> > Regards,
> > James
> >
> >
> > On 2017-12-19 20:43, Jacques Le Roux  wrote:
> >> Now that we seems to agree about discussing each case, what about mine? :)
> >>
> >> Jacques
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 19/12/2017 à 11:31, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
> >>> My preference is to create the branch now and discuss on a case by case 
> >>> the
> >>> backporting of any additional feature.
> >>>
> >>> Jacopo
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> >>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  Le 18/12/2017 à 18:02, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are 3 tasks that I'd like to be completed/committed before we 
> > create
> >> the R17 branch (or maybe a R18 one)
> >>
> >> 1. Tomcat SSO: OFBIZ-10047
> >> 2. Upgrade jQuery 1.11.0 to jQuery 3.2.1: OFBIZ-9978
> >> 3. The thread "OFBiz & gradlew-wrapper.jar" in this ML:
> >> http://markmail.org/message/nd7grfiyobjkfwae
> >>
> >> 1. For jQuery it's just a matter of completing, most it done
> >> 2. Tomcat SSO is complete, but Michael is reluctant because it has not
> >> been tested with a cluster.
> >> 3. For OFBiz & gradlew-wrapper.jar please refer to LEGAL-288 before
> >> continuing the discussion
> >>
> >> So I ask for a lazy consensus about them,
> >>
> > Could you please better elaborate about what the lazy consensus would
> > achieve in these 3 cases?
> > For #3, I think we can create the branch and then figure it out before
> > issuing the first release oout of it (it will take weeks if not months).
> >
> > Jacopo
> >
>  Mmm, I thought it was clear enough. Let me try to summarise then:
> 
>  1. Should we commit it to have it in R17?
>  2. Should we wait for this task to be complete before freezing R17?
>  3. Your proposition is OK with me
> 
>  Jacques
> 
> 
> 
> > what are your opinions (please look at the Jiras and ML I don't want to
> >> rehash all here)?
> >>
> >> Also "I have" ideas for 2018, based on ideas from 2014, but that's
> >> another
> >> topic :)
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Jacques
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 18/12/2017 à 16:19, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hi Jacopo, all,
> >>> I've just finished committing all those FindBugs and refactoring 
> >>> issues
> >>> so no more show stoppers from my side to create the next release 
> >>> branch
> >>> :-)
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Michael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am 28.11.17 um 17:03 schrieb Michael Brohl:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Jacopo,
>  I am planning to do a bunch of FindBugs/refactoring commits in the
>  coming days/weeks, hopefully all of the currently open issues.
> 
>  It would be great if we can move the release to December.
> 
>  @all: any help on the FindBugs/refactoring issues by fellow 
>  committers
>  are greatly appreciated ;-)
> 
>  Thanks and regards,
> 
>  Michael
> 
> 
>  Am 28.11.17 um 16:42 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
> 
>  It's the end of November and we are close to the deadline for the
> > creation
> > of the 17.11 branches: how do we feel about it?
> > Let me know if you want me to proceed, otherwise we will create the
> > branches in December and they will be named 17.12
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jacopo
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Nicolas Malin <
> > nicolas.ma...@nereide.fr>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Agree to create the release 17.11 with a separate products 
> >> framework
> >> &
> >> plugins.
> >>
> >> It's woulb be nice to create this release one week after the next
> >> community days :)
> >>
> >> Nicolas
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 10/10/2017 à 

Re: Are we ready to publish a new release (16.11.04)?

[Rishi Solanki]

+1.

Thanks!

Rishi Solanki
Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: +91-9893287847
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Michael Brohl 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 19.12.17 um 16:43 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
>
> Hi all,
>>
>> we have published our last release mostly 6 months ago and since then we
>> have merged several bug fixes to our 16.11 branch: I think it is time to
>> publish a new one!
>>
>> If there are no objections I am going to prepare the release files in the
>> next few days and then we will start the release vote: if you think we
>> should backport fixes to that branch this is the right time to do it
>> before
>> we start the release process.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Mentoring program

[Sanjay Yadav]

Great. Thanks!

Best Regards,

*Sanjay Yadav* | Manager, Enterprise Quality Assurance
HotWax Commerce  by HotWax Systems

80, Scheme No. 78, Part II, Indore, M.P. 452010, India
Mobile Phone: 787 918 8830 | Linkedin: Sanjay-Yadav



On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

> Done
>
> Jacques
>
>
>
> Le 20/11/2017 à 09:34, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think adding a short sentence and a link to
>>
>> https://community.apache.org/mentoringprogramme.html
>>
>> in our Apache OFBiz Contributors page
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Apache+OFB
>> iz+Contributors
>>
>> would be a good thing.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Tracking Data Model changes

[Aditya Sharma]

Thank you all for your valuable inputs.

We have added the markdown file to trunk with all the data model changes
from Release 9 to Release 17 at R1818765 and it will soon be part of the
next release. The page is also added as child page to wiki page Revisions
Requiring Data Migration - upgrade ofbiz
 as Data Migration by releases


Thanks Sonal Patwari for the efforts put into gathering information for the
Big Book.

Thanks Jacques Le Roux, Michael Brohl, Pranay Pandey, and Deepak Dixit for
providing personal attention to the whole effort.


Cheers,

*Aditya Sharma* | Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce  by HotWax Systems




On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Aditya Sharma <
aditya.sha...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I have created a ticket here
> .
>
> I will be adding information about data model changes between OFBiz.9 to
> OFBiz.17.11 in the initial file.
>
> As commented on the ticket,
>
> The file will have the format:
>
>
> Entity Changes:
>
> Here we will have a bulleted list with entity names and the revision number
> 1. Added Entities
> 2. Removed Entities
>
>
> Field changes:
>
> Here we will show data in tabular form in following format:
>
> entityname | field | action | isPK | revision
>
>
> Any suggestions are warmly welcomed.
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> *Aditya Sharma* | Enterprise Software Engineer
> HotWax Systems 
> 
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Michael Brohl 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for tracking datamodel changes together with data migration scripts
>>
>> In our customer projects, we track every change in a simple text file in
>> the source code repository. It contains description of the changes,
>> references to issues or requirement documentation and SQL scripts for
>> migrations.
>>
>> In OFBiz, we should at least provide SQL scripts for the embedded Derby
>> database, maybe there will be contributions for other databases as well.
>>
>> Something like db-changelog.derby.txt, db-changelog.mysql.txt or similar.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> Am 31.08.17 um 12:32 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
>>
>> Hi Ashish,
>>>
>>> With respect to Jacques' question, I kind of already answered in that
>>> it is not only documentation but also automation.
>>>
>>> Now with respect to which releases to incorporate, it really depends
>>> on what the community decides. I would personally prefer to not go any
>>> earlier than 13, or preferably just 16 to trunk, which means we design
>>> this solution for the future, not necessarily the past. The powerful
>>> thing in using something like liquibase is that not only do you change
>>> the schema (the entity engine can do that partially) but you also
>>> decide on how to migrate the existing data to the new schema. For
>>> example, you might need to split a field to two, or merge two fields,
>>> and so on and so forth.
>>>
>>> Anyway, this is only an idea if people are interested in it. The
>>> original idea of just documenting is also perfectly reasonable and
>>> beneficial.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Ashish Vijaywargiya
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 +1, Taher. I will wait for your comment on Jacques question, we already
 have a document but I think the automated script that can be implemented
 here. Liquidbase and flyway seem to be promising solutions!

 One question always comes to my mind: Can we say that automated scripts
 will support the migration from last two or at max three known releases?
 I think we should not put the effort in building the migration script
 that
 could migrate ofbiz earlier version(Let's say Ofbiz 10 or 9 or 4) to the
 latest version. Please share your thoughts on this.

 Kind Regards
 Ashish Vijaywargiya
 HotWax Systems - est. 1997 


 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Taher Alkhateeb <
 slidingfilame...@gmail.com

> wrote:
> Good idea! Why not take it a step further, and write data migration
> scripts? They will serve two purposes in one: 1) document changes 2)
> automate upgrades.
>
> You can experiment with solutions like liquibase or flyway
>
> On Aug 30, 2017 4:23 PM, "Aditya Sharma" <
> aditya.sha...@hotwaxsystems.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> For one of my assignments, I need to find out entity changes that took
> place between an older release and the latest release.
>
> One of the solutions that came up was comparing the database using
> MySQL
> Workbench or some other utility. I found around 60+ new entity changes
> 

Re: Are we ready to publish a new release (16.11.04)?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 20/12/2017 à 10:41, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

are these bugs fixed in trunk and not just not backported?

I don't know, too much cases to review


Else we should go on with a new release and backport once they are fixed in 
trunk.

Yep



What makes you think that this would be the last 16.11 release?

Was just a guess :) See my answer to Jacopo, it's OK with me.

Jacques


Regards,

Michael


Am 20.12.17 um 09:11 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

Hi Jacopo,

We have 35 bugs with patches available and priority >= Major

I want to check them before plussing because this will be our last R16 release 
I guess

Thanks

Jacques


Le 19/12/2017 à 16:43, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

we have published our last release mostly 6 months ago and since then we
have merged several bug fixes to our 16.11 branch: I think it is time to
publish a new one!

If there are no objections I am going to prepare the release files in the
next few days and then we will start the release vote: if you think we
should backport fixes to that branch this is the right time to do it before
we start the release process.

Kind regards,

Jacopo

Re: Are we ready to publish a new release (16.11.04)?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Then that's OK with me, I'll have more time to review these 35 cases...

+1

Jacques


Le 20/12/2017 à 11:05, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:


Hi Jacopo,

We have 35 bugs with patches available and priority >= Major

I want to check them before plussing because this will be our last R16
release I guess


I think we can keep this branch alive for more time since it is the only
active release branch and the new one will need to be stabilized.

Jacopo



Thanks

Jacques



Le 19/12/2017 à 16:43, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :


Hi all,

we have published our last release mostly 6 months ago and since then we
have merged several bug fixes to our 16.11 branch: I think it is time to
publish a new one!

If there are no objections I am going to prepare the release files in the
next few days and then we will start the release vote: if you think we
should backport fixes to that branch this is the right time to do it
before
we start the release process.

Kind regards,

Jacopo

Re: Planning for the creation of the new 17.xx branch(es)

[Jacques Le Roux]

Done

Jacques


Le 19/12/2017 à 13:53, Aditya Sharma a écrit :

As per the discussion on http://markmail.org/message/4mrffmp5j2mujv3w and
OFBIZ-9902. 
We have prepared markdown file with the data model changes from OFBiz R9 to
17.
It will help users/developers to identify data model changes that come with
the release.

I think this can be the part of our next release. Patch is available on the
ticket, kindly have a look and let me know if any changes required.



Thanks and Regards,

*Aditya Sharma* | Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce  by HotWax Systems




On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:


+1

Jacques



Le 19/12/2017 à 11:53, Deepak Dixit a écrit :


+1

I would like to backport ecommerce UX improvement work and remaining
jquery
upgrade  work.

Thanks & Regards
--
Deepak Dixit
www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Nicolas Malin 
wrote:

sound good +1



Le 19/12/2017 à 11:31, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

My preference is to create the branch now and discuss on a case by case

the
backporting of any additional feature.

Jacopo

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

Le 18/12/2017 à 18:02, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :


On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux <


jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

There are 3 tasks that I'd like to be completed/committed before we
create

the R17 branch (or maybe a R18 one)

1. Tomcat SSO: OFBIZ-10047
2. Upgrade jQuery 1.11.0 to jQuery 3.2.1: OFBIZ-9978
3. The thread "OFBiz & gradlew-wrapper.jar" in this ML:
http://markmail.org/message/nd7grfiyobjkfwae

1. For jQuery it's just a matter of completing, most it done
2. Tomcat SSO is complete, but Michael is reluctant because it has
not
been tested with a cluster.
3. For OFBiz & gradlew-wrapper.jar please refer to LEGAL-288 before
continuing the discussion

So I ask for a lazy consensus about them,

Could you please better elaborate about what the lazy consensus would


achieve in these 3 cases?
For #3, I think we can create the branch and then figure it out before
issuing the first release oout of it (it will take weeks if not
months).

Jacopo

Mmm, I thought it was clear enough. Let me try to summarise then:


1. Should we commit it to have it in R17?
2. Should we wait for this task to be complete before freezing R17?
3. Your proposition is OK with me

Jacques



what are your opinions (please look at the Jiras and ML I don't want to


rehash all here)?

Also "I have" ideas for 2018, based on ideas from 2014, but that's
another
topic :)

Thanks

Jacques



Le 18/12/2017 à 16:19, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi Jacopo, all,

I've just finished committing all those FindBugs and refactoring

issues
so no more show stoppers from my side to create the next release
branch
:-)

Thanks,

Michael


Am 28.11.17 um 17:03 schrieb Michael Brohl:

Hi Jacopo,

I am planning to do a bunch of FindBugs/refactoring commits in the

coming days/weeks, hopefully all of the currently open issues.

It would be great if we can move the release to December.

@all: any help on the FindBugs/refactoring issues by fellow
committers
are greatly appreciated ;-)

Thanks and regards,

Michael


Am 28.11.17 um 16:42 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:

It's the end of November and we are close to the deadline for the

creation

of the 17.11 branches: how do we feel about it?
Let me know if you want me to proceed, otherwise we will create
the
branches in December and they will be named 17.12

Regards,

Jacopo

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Nicolas Malin <
nicolas.ma...@nereide.fr>
wrote:

Hi,

Agree to create the release 17.11 with a separate products
framework


&
plugins.

It's woulb be nice to create this release one week after the next
community days :)

Nicolas



Le 10/10/2017 à 09:35, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

I think it is time to start thinking about if, when, how we
should


create
the new release branch out of the trunk. Actually, for the first
time, we
should probably create two branches: one for the framework and
one
for the
plugins.
What do you think?

In my opinion we could try to get all the changes we want to
have
in
the
trunk to be included in the branch by end of November: this
means
that the
the creation of the branch could happen at the end of November.
If this is the case then the names could be:
release17.11-framework
release17.11-plugins

The above is for the release *branches* only, not for the actual
releases.
We could decide at a later point if the actual releases will be
shipped as
two separate products (e.g. "Apache OFBiz Framework 17.11.01"
and
"Apache
OFBiz Plugins 17.11.01") or merged into one (e.g. "Apache OFBiz
17.11.01").

Best regards,

Jacopo

Re: Are we ready to publish a new release (16.11.04)?

[Jacopo Cappellato]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

> Hi Jacopo,
>
> We have 35 bugs with patches available and priority >= Major
>
> I want to check them before plussing because this will be our last R16
> release I guess
>

I think we can keep this branch alive for more time since it is the only
active release branch and the new one will need to be stabilized.

Jacopo


>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
>
>
> Le 19/12/2017 à 16:43, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> we have published our last release mostly 6 months ago and since then we
>> have merged several bug fixes to our 16.11 branch: I think it is time to
>> publish a new one!
>>
>> If there are no objections I am going to prepare the release files in the
>> next few days and then we will start the release vote: if you think we
>> should backport fixes to that branch this is the right time to do it
>> before
>> we start the release process.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>
>

Re: Are we ready to publish a new release (16.11.04)?

[Michael Brohl]

Hi Jacques,

are these bugs fixed in trunk and not just not backported?

Else we should go on with a new release and backport once they are fixed 
in trunk.


What makes you think that this would be the last 16.11 release?

Regards,

Michael


Am 20.12.17 um 09:11 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

Hi Jacopo,

We have 35 bugs with patches available and priority >= Major

I want to check them before plussing because this will be our last R16 
release I guess


Thanks

Jacques


Le 19/12/2017 à 16:43, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

we have published our last release mostly 6 months ago and since then we
have merged several bug fixes to our 16.11 branch: I think it is time to
publish a new one!

If there are no objections I am going to prepare the release files in 
the

next few days and then we will start the release vote: if you think we
should backport fixes to that branch this is the right time to do it 
before

we start the release process.

Kind regards,

Jacopo








smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Planning for the creation of the new 17.xx branch(es)

[Jacques Le Roux]

That's a good idea James.

Will you handle the cluster implementation and test?

BTW it's the only point among those I raised which remains after the suggestion 
of backporting features on case by case in R17

Jacques


Le 20/12/2017 à 06:32, James Yong a écrit :

Hi All,

Can we commit the code for Tomcat SSO (OFBIZ-10047) but switch the feature off?
Once the Cluster SSO is ready, we can backport to the 17.xx branch with Tomcat 
SSO turned on.

Regards,
James


On 2017-12-19 20:43, Jacques Le Roux  wrote:

Now that we seems to agree about discussing each case, what about mine? :)

Jacques


Le 19/12/2017 à 11:31, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

My preference is to create the branch now and discuss on a case by case the
backporting of any additional feature.

Jacopo

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:


Le 18/12/2017 à 18:02, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :


On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

There are 3 tasks that I'd like to be completed/committed before we create

the R17 branch (or maybe a R18 one)

1. Tomcat SSO: OFBIZ-10047
2. Upgrade jQuery 1.11.0 to jQuery 3.2.1: OFBIZ-9978
3. The thread "OFBiz & gradlew-wrapper.jar" in this ML:
http://markmail.org/message/nd7grfiyobjkfwae

1. For jQuery it's just a matter of completing, most it done
2. Tomcat SSO is complete, but Michael is reluctant because it has not
been tested with a cluster.
3. For OFBiz & gradlew-wrapper.jar please refer to LEGAL-288 before
continuing the discussion

So I ask for a lazy consensus about them,


Could you please better elaborate about what the lazy consensus would
achieve in these 3 cases?
For #3, I think we can create the branch and then figure it out before
issuing the first release oout of it (it will take weeks if not months).

Jacopo


Mmm, I thought it was clear enough. Let me try to summarise then:

1. Should we commit it to have it in R17?
2. Should we wait for this task to be complete before freezing R17?
3. Your proposition is OK with me

Jacques




what are your opinions (please look at the Jiras and ML I don't want to

rehash all here)?

Also "I have" ideas for 2018, based on ideas from 2014, but that's
another
topic :)

Thanks

Jacques



Le 18/12/2017 à 16:19, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi Jacopo, all,

I've just finished committing all those FindBugs and refactoring issues
so no more show stoppers from my side to create the next release branch
:-)

Thanks,

Michael


Am 28.11.17 um 17:03 schrieb Michael Brohl:

Hi Jacopo,

I am planning to do a bunch of FindBugs/refactoring commits in the
coming days/weeks, hopefully all of the currently open issues.

It would be great if we can move the release to December.

@all: any help on the FindBugs/refactoring issues by fellow committers
are greatly appreciated ;-)

Thanks and regards,

Michael


Am 28.11.17 um 16:42 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:

It's the end of November and we are close to the deadline for the

creation
of the 17.11 branches: how do we feel about it?
Let me know if you want me to proceed, otherwise we will create the
branches in December and they will be named 17.12

Regards,

Jacopo

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Nicolas Malin <
nicolas.ma...@nereide.fr>
wrote:

Hi,


Agree to create the release 17.11 with a separate products framework
&
plugins.

It's woulb be nice to create this release one week after the next
community days :)

Nicolas



Le 10/10/2017 à 09:35, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,


I think it is time to start thinking about if, when, how we should
create
the new release branch out of the trunk. Actually, for the first
time, we
should probably create two branches: one for the framework and one
for the
plugins.
What do you think?

In my opinion we could try to get all the changes we want to have in
the
trunk to be included in the branch by end of November: this means
that the
the creation of the branch could happen at the end of November.
If this is the case then the names could be:
release17.11-framework
release17.11-plugins

The above is for the release *branches* only, not for the actual
releases.
We could decide at a later point if the actual releases will be
shipped as
two separate products (e.g. "Apache OFBiz Framework 17.11.01" and
"Apache
OFBiz Plugins 17.11.01") or merged into one (e.g. "Apache OFBiz
17.11.01").

Best regards,

Jacopo

Re: Are we ready to publish a new release (16.11.04)?

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi Jacopo,

We have 35 bugs with patches available and priority >= Major

I want to check them before plussing because this will be our last R16 release 
I guess

Thanks

Jacques


Le 19/12/2017 à 16:43, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi all,

we have published our last release mostly 6 months ago and since then we
have merged several bug fixes to our 16.11 branch: I think it is time to
publish a new one!

If there are no objections I am going to prepare the release files in the
next few days and then we will start the release vote: if you think we
should backport fixes to that branch this is the right time to do it before
we start the release process.

Kind regards,

Jacopo