Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-15 Thread Devanshu Vyas
+1
Thanks & Regards,
Devanshu Vyas.


On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 12:34 PM Leila Mekika  wrote:

> +1
>
> Le 03/09/2024 à 15:21, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the
> > creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of
> > the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.
> >
> > Why:
> >  * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
> >  * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are
> > working well).
> >  * The current version is over 6 years old
> >  * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a
> > lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll
> > probably miss the release stage.
> >  * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D
> >
> > If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch
> > creation to the vote in a few days.
> >
> > Nicolas
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1
> >
>


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-03 Thread Daniel Watford
+1

Sounds good to me.

On Tue, 3 Sept 2024 at 14:21, Nicolas Malin 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the
> creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of
> the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.
>
> Why:
>   * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
>   * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are
> working well).
>   * The current version is over 6 years old
>   * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a
> lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll
> probably miss the release stage.
>   * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D
>
> If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch creation
> to the vote in a few days.
>
> Nicolas
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1
>


-- 
Daniel Watford


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-03 Thread Jacques Le Roux

+1

Sounds good, thanks

Jacques

Le 03/09/2024 à 17:32, gil a écrit :

+1

Thanks,

Gil

On 03/09/2024 15:21, Nicolas Malin wrote:

Hello,

After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the
creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of
the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.

Why:
  * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
  * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are
working well).
  * The current version is over 6 years old
  * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a
lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll
probably miss the release stage.
  * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D

If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch
creation to the vote in a few days.

Nicolas

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-03 Thread gil
+1

Thanks,

Gil

On 03/09/2024 15:21, Nicolas Malin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the
> creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of
> the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.
>
> Why:
>  * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
>  * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are
> working well).
>  * The current version is over 6 years old
>  * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a
> lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll
> probably miss the release stage.
>  * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D
>
> If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch
> creation to the vote in a few days.
>
> Nicolas
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1
>


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-03 Thread Jacopo Cappellato
+1

Thank you!

Jacopo

On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 3:21 PM Nicolas Malin  wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the
> creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of
> the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.
>
> Why:
>   * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
>   * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are
> working well).
>   * The current version is over 6 years old
>   * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a
> lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll
> probably miss the release stage.
>   * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D
>
> If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch creation
> to the vote in a few days.
>
> Nicolas
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-03 Thread Michael Brohl

+1

Thanks Nicolas,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de


Am 03.09.24 um 15:21 schrieb Nicolas Malin:

Hello,

After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the 
creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of 
the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.


Why:
 * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
 * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are 
working well).

 * The current version is over 6 years old
 * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a 
lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll 
probably miss the release stage.

 * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D

If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch 
creation to the vote in a few days.


Nicolas

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-09-03 Thread Nicolas Malin

Hello,

After going through this thread [1], I propose to go ahead with the 
creation of the `release24` branch in a few weeks, and the release of 
the next official version 2 or 3 weeks later.


Why:
 * We've decided to leave release22.01 unpublished.
 * The trunk has been stable for a long time (integration tests are 
working well).

 * The current version is over 6 years old
 * If we wait another year for stabilization, there's a chance that a 
lot of work-in-progress will be added, and as with release 22, we'll 
probably miss the release stage.

 * We have a lot of work to do on the trunk :D

If there are no major objection, I'll put the release24 branch creation 
to the vote in a few days.


Nicolas

[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/k903dobd1z0hm9qxo3prn8gzc71jrnx1


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-09 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Le 09/05/2024 à 13:21, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Michael,

Inline again

Le 08/05/2024 à 21:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :


3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry 
unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after

4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not 
rolled out for every component.


I'm unsure that these changes are not complete for every component and even if 
it's the case it should not block the creation of a release branch.
And if ever issues remain (not necessarily related to these changes) it's not a 
big deal to fix them once freezed.


Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an 
almost stable trunk.


So you speak about other known issues than 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995.
Have you a clear view about them ? Else my answer to 4. should be reassure you, 
not a big deal.

To complete, I guess you speak about 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12928.
A large majority is completely done and resolved when needed (thanks to trunk 
demo logs)

Only 3 (on 46)  are pending:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12951. I let a bit of time to 
Pierre. If it's still pending when we want to Freeze we should revert.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12978. Nothing done there yet.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-13042. Waiting for a fix before 
pushing.

As ever with Pierre, we disagree about 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-13068.
As I said there, and knowing how it gets in such cases, I prefer to "keep this issue 
reopened and I'll not close your PR."

I have created 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+24.xx+Roadmap

Unrelated : I also plan to close a lot of old pending Jira soon...

Jacques


There is also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-13049. But that's out 
of scope for the moment.



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-09 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Hi Michael,

Inline again

Le 08/05/2024 à 21:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :


3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry 
unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after

4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not 
rolled out for every component.


I'm unsure that these changes are not complete for every component and even if 
it's the case it should not block the creation of a release branch.
And if ever issues remain (not necessarily related to these changes) it's not a 
big deal to fix them once freezed.


Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an 
almost stable trunk.


So you speak about other known issues than 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995.
Have you a clear view about them ? Else my answer to 4. should be reassure you, 
not a big deal.

To complete, I guess you speak about 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12928.
A large majority is completely done and resolved when needed (thanks to trunk 
demo logs)

Only 3 (on 46)  are pending:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12951. I let a bit of time to 
Pierre. If it's still pending when we want to Freeze we should revert.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12978. Nothing done there yet.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-13042. Waiting for a fix before 
pushing.

As ever with Pierre, we disagree about 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-13068.
As I said there, and knowing how it gets in such cases, I prefer to "keep this issue 
reopened and I'll not close your PR."

I have created 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+24.xx+Roadmap

Unrelated : I also plan to close a lot of old pending Jira soon...

Jacques



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-08 Thread Jacques Le Roux
Ah, last but not least: I think we should at least wait for Freemarker 2.3.33 that we successfully tested on demo. The vote should be soon, hence the 
release.


Le 08/05/2024 à 20:47, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Thanks to clarify Michael,

Inline when needed...

Le 08/05/2024 à 13:59, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi everyone,

my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to avoid 
the situation we have now:


1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago

2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by Jacques if 
I remember correctly


I guess you speak about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995 ?




3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry 
unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after

4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not 
rolled out for every component.


I'm unsure that these changes are not complete for every component and even if 
it's the case it should not block the creation of a release branch.
And if ever issues remain (not necessarily related to these changes) it's not a 
big deal to fix them once freezed.


Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an 
almost stable trunk.


So you speak about other known issues than 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995.
Have you a clear view about them ? Else my answer to 4. should be reassure you, 
not a big deal.
What helped me a lot in this recent experience is to review the demos logs 
(stable and trunk).
I remember a project I worked on and was the last person to leave because they 
needed me to scrutinise the logs :)




If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of working 
on the creation of the new branch.

That would be good, we used roadmaps in the past. Not all among them were 
successful or even followed.

IIRW the 1st one was mostly successful: 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/4.x+Proposed+Roadmap+Items

Others maybe less, just search "roadmap" in the wiki. Most were created by Sharan. Just to give an idea, here is one roadmap seriously discussed 
(most others were less).

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Roadmap+Diagrams+-+In+Progress

We also need to plan the time we want to give to fix the release branch before 
releasing. We use to finish it in the current year.
From my OFBiz experience, it's just a plan anyway, ie it can be shorter or 
longer.




My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going with the flow of 
incoming pull requests.


I hope I was more clear now.


Yes, thanks

Jacques



Thanks and regards,

Michael


Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey:

Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of creating a new release.

After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new
features there.

This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing
development in the trunk.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hi Jacques,

I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?

Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?

I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.

I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
release branch.

If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
the release branch was created.

I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
weeds of discussion.

Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?

As far as which commits are later applied to the 

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-08 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Thanks to clarify Michael,

Inline when needed...

Le 08/05/2024 à 13:59, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi everyone,

my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to avoid 
the situation we have now:


1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago

2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by Jacques if 
I remember correctly


I guess you speak about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995 ?




3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry 
unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after

4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not complete/not 
rolled out for every component.


I'm unsure that these changes are not complete for every component and even if 
it's the case it should not block the creation of a release branch.
And if ever issues remain (not necessarily related to these changes) it's not a 
big deal to fix them once freezed.


Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from an 
almost stable trunk.


So you speak about other known issues than 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12995.
Have you a clear view about them ? Else my answer to 4. should be reassure you, 
not a big deal.
What helped me a lot in this recent experience is to review the demos logs 
(stable and trunk).
I remember a project I worked on and was the last person to leave because they 
needed me to scrutinise the logs :)




If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of working 
on the creation of the new branch.

That would be good, we used roadmaps in the past. Not all among them were 
successful or even followed.

IIRW the 1st one was mostly successful: 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/4.x+Proposed+Roadmap+Items

Others maybe less, just search "roadmap" in the wiki. Most were created by Sharan. Just to give an idea, here is one roadmap seriously discussed (most 
others were less).

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Roadmap+Diagrams+-+In+Progress

We also need to plan the time we want to give to fix the release branch before 
releasing. We use to finish it in the current year.
From my OFBiz experience, it's just a plan anyway, ie it can be shorter or 
longer.




My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going with the flow of 
incoming pull requests.


I hope I was more clear now.


Yes, thanks

Jacques



Thanks and regards,

Michael


Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey:

Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of creating a new release.

After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new
features there.

This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing
development in the trunk.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hi Jacques,

I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?

Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?

I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.

I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
release branch.

If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
the release branch was created.

I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
weeds of discussion.

Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?

As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder
that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test
burden before a public release can be m

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-08 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Thanks for confirming

Le 08/05/2024 à 15:45, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

Yeah, I wanted to say that. As long as we are sure of test coverage, all
the critical paths are working.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 22:11, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:


Ha sorry Pranay,

I did not get your point, I guess you were discussing before frezzing the
release branch, right?
Then of course we can't guarantee to have fixed all known bugs.
Only blocker bugs (decided by the reporter and discussed if needed) and of
course security bugs are blocking a release.

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 17:42, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Pranay,

OK, but then only that? So far we backported any bug. So we would

release a branch with bugs in?

Le 07/05/2024 à 16:42, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

what is a blocker bug, only security?
I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the

process

level.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux <

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

wrote:


What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx

where

the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other

words,

apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and

the

"new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
then
what is a blocker bug, only security?

Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches

that

we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html

HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I

liked

the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while

working on

the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller

changes

are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration

for

existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the

new

features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will

help

in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue

the

discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the

OFBiz

development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hello all,

I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually

are

in

this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we

are

probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.

Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it

seems

there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the

trunk

branch.

Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk,

named

something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming

OFBiz

release. New features would not normally be applied to the

release-24.05

branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a

case-by-case

basis.

Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira,

and

once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag -

e.g.

release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to

denote

the commit that was publicly released.

I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed

releases in

the past.

The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development

community/PMC

decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release

branch.

It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement

of

Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now

might

be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from

trunk.

Thanks,

Dan.

On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux <

jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com

wrote:


Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely? And that are their situations?

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely?

And WHAT are their situations?

Sorry, typo



--
Daniel Watford



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-08 Thread Pranay Pandey
Hi Jacques,

Yeah, I wanted to say that. As long as we are sure of test coverage, all
the critical paths are working.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 22:11, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:

> Ha sorry Pranay,
>
> I did not get your point, I guess you were discussing before frezzing the
> release branch, right?
> Then of course we can't guarantee to have fixed all known bugs.
> Only blocker bugs (decided by the reporter and discussed if needed) and of
> course security bugs are blocking a release.
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 07/05/2024 à 17:42, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > Hi Pranay,
> >
> > OK, but then only that? So far we backported any bug. So we would
> release a branch with bugs in?
> >
> > Le 07/05/2024 à 16:42, Pranay Pandey a écrit :
> >> Hi Jacques,
> >>
> >> what is a blocker bug, only security?
> >> I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the
> process
> >> level.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Pranay Pandey
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx
> where
> >>> the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other
> words,
> >>> apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and
> the
> >>> "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
> >>> then
> >>> what is a blocker bug, only security?
> >>>
> >>> Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches
> that
> >>> we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
> >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html
> >>>
> >>> HTH
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >>> Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :
>  Dear Daniel,
> 
>  Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I
> liked
>  the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
>  address blockers for the upcoming release.
> 
>  I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while
> working on
>  the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
>  releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller
> >>> changes
>  are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration
> for
>  existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the
> new
>  features introduced.
> 
>  I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will
> >>> help
>  in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue
> >>> the
>  discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the
> >>> OFBiz
>  development community.
> 
>  Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.
> 
>  Best regards,
> 
>  Pranay Pandey
> 
> 
>  On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:
> 
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually
> are
> >>> in
> > this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we
> >>> are
> > probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.
> >
> > Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it
> >>> seems
> > there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the
> trunk
> > branch.
> >
> > Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk,
> named
> > something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
> > address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming
> >>> OFBiz
> > release. New features would not normally be applied to the
> release-24.05
> > branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a
> >>> case-by-case
> > basis.
> >
> > Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira,
> and
> > once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag -
> e.g.
> > release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to
> >>> denote
> > the commit that was publicly released.
> >
> > I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed
> >>> releases in
> > the past.
> >
> > The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
> > process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development
> community/PMC
> > decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release
> branch.
> >
> > It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement
> of
> > Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now
> >>> might
> > be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from
> >>> trunk.
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dan.
> >
> > On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux <
> >>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> >>> B

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-08 Thread Pranay Pandey
Hi Michael,

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to have a structure in place for sure.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Wed, 8 May 2024 at 17:30, Michael Brohl  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk
> (for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to
> avoid the situation we have now:
>
> 1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago
>
> 2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by
> Jacques if I remember correctly
>
> 3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry
> unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after
>
> 4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not
> complete/not rolled out for every component.
>
> Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and
> worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from
> an almost stable trunk.
>
> If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was
> happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of
> working on the creation of the new branch.
>
> My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and
> collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going
> with the flow of incoming pull requests.
>
> I hope I was more clear now.
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > I am in favor of creating a new release.
> >
> > After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new
> > features there.
> >
> > This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing
> > development in the trunk.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Pranay Pandey
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jacques,
> >>
> >> I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
> >> difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?
> >>
> >> Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a
> feature-freeze on
> >> trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
> >> feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?
> >>
> >> I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on
> what
> >> sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g.
> release-24.x),
> >> but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
> >> the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.
> >>
> >> I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
> >> release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
> >> Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release
> where
> >> we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature
> was
> >> very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
> >> release branch.
> >>
> >> If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
> >> stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
> >> https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the
> release
> >> branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the
> time
> >> the release branch was created.
> >>
> >> I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
> >> weeds of discussion.
> >>
> >> Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
> >> the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
> >> features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?
> >>
> >> As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
> >> shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a
> reminder
> >> that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the
> test
> >> burden before a public release can be made?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Dan.
> >>
> >> On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx
> >> where
> >>> the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other
> >> words,
> >>> apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and
> the
> >>> "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
> >>> then
> >>> what is a blocker bug, only security?
> >>>
> >>> Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches
> >> that
> >>> we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
> >>> https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html
> >>>
> >>> HTH
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >>> Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :
>  Dear Daniel,
> 
>  Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I
> >> liked
>  the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
>  address blockers for the upcoming release.
> 
>  I agree with Michael's proposal tha

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-08 Thread Michael Brohl

Hi everyone,

my main point for having a roadmap and (if necessary) freezing trunk 
(for a short time) before creating a release branch in the future was to 
avoid the situation we have now:


1. we agreed to create a new release branch some time ago

2. there were some open tasks which blocked 1., mainly brought up by 
Jacques if I remember correctly


3. suddenly there was a mass of new PR's which were merged in a hurry 
unneccesarily (my personal point of view), with some corrections soon after


4. 3. blocks 1. even further now because those changes are not 
complete/not rolled out for every component.


Instead of 3. we should have delayed merging those new features and 
worked on the blocking issues of 2. to be able to create a release from 
an almost stable trunk.


If we had a roadmap, I think we would have discussed 3. before it was 
happening and decided to wait merging those new features in favor of 
working on the creation of the new branch.


My approach is simply about some structure, coordination and 
collaboration to reach goals the project has defined instead of going 
with the flow of incoming pull requests.


I hope I was more clear now.

Thanks and regards,

Michael


Am 07.05.24 um 17:19 schrieb Pranay Pandey:

Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of creating a new release.

After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new
features there.

This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing
development in the trunk.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hi Jacques,

I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?

Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?

I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.

I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
release branch.

If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
the release branch was created.

I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
weeds of discussion.

Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?

As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder
that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test
burden before a public release can be made?

Thanks,

Dan.

On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux 
What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx

where

the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other

words,

apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
"new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
then
what is a blocker bug, only security?

Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches

that

we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html

HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I

liked

the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working

on

the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller

changes

are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration

for

existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will

help

in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue

the

discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the

OFBiz

development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Jacques Le Roux

I totally agree, our enemy is regression and we should be very sure to avoid it.

Le 07/05/2024 à 17:19, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of creating a new release.

After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new
features there.

This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing
development in the trunk.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hi Jacques,

I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?

Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?

I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.

I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
release branch.

If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
the release branch was created.

I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
weeds of discussion.

Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?

As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder
that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test
burden before a public release can be made?

Thanks,

Dan.

On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux 
What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx

where

the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other

words,

apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
"new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
then
what is a blocker bug, only security?

Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches

that

we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html

HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I

liked

the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working

on

the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller

changes

are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration

for

existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will

help

in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue

the

discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the

OFBiz

development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hello all,

I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are

in

this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we

are

probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.

Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it

seems

there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the

trunk

branch.

Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk,

named

something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming

OFBiz

release. New features would not normally be applied to the

release-24.05

branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a

case-by-case

basis.

Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira,

and

once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to

denote

the commit that was publicly released.

I believe the above describes how th

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Ha sorry Pranay,

I did not get your point, I guess you were discussing before frezzing the 
release branch, right?
Then of course we can't guarantee to have fixed all known bugs.
Only blocker bugs (decided by the reporter and discussed if needed) and of 
course security bugs are blocking a release.

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 17:42, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Pranay,

OK, but then only that? So far we backported any bug. So we would release a 
branch with bugs in?

Le 07/05/2024 à 16:42, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

what is a blocker bug, only security?
I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the process
level.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:


What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where
the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words,
apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
"new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
then
what is a blocker bug, only security?

Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that
we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html

HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on
the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller

changes

are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for
existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will

help

in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue

the

discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the

OFBiz

development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hello all,

I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are

in

this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we

are

probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.

Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it

seems

there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
branch.

Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming

OFBiz

release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a

case-by-case

basis.

Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to

denote

the commit that was publicly released.

I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed

releases in

the past.

The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch.

It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of
Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now

might

be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from

trunk.

Thanks,

Dan.

On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux <

jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com

wrote:


Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely? And that are their situations?

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely?

And WHAT are their situations?

Sorry, typo



--
Daniel Watford



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Le 07/05/2024 à 17:01, Daniel Watford a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?


Simple, what is the process so far?

We freeze the trunk into a release branch, says 24.xx in our case
.05 seems short to me, though possible, as we need to check the situation for 
important things to be complete (or not), like OFBIZ-9350
I see the recent good will of Nicolas about that. We should not put the 
pression on anybody. Errors come from such situations.

Then improvements are of course allowed in trunk but not in 24.xx apart 
exceptions agreed with a consensus (lazy or not, ie with a vote)
As we use the CTR (Commit Then Review) mode it's always possible to revert 
before releasing, here 24.xx. So no known damage is theoretically possible.

Blocker bugs are used to prevent a release as long as not fixed, as mentioned 
at :
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz
There is no strict definition for a blocker bug. The reporter decides. It can 
be then discussed.
Of course security is blocking, but we don't publish any information about it 
before releasing. Else it's a zero day for attackers.



Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?


I just try to explain that the current process is OK.
We never feature-freezed the trunk but the upcoming release, again with very 
rare exceptions.
So I'd like to know what should be changed if any.



I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.


I agree about that. We have never been able to fix all bugs. Just blocker bugs 
block the release and that can be discussed.
For blocker bugs, if we don't agree in Jira or PR we discuss it on dev ML to 
tend to a consensus. That can be a lazy one (no vote) if nobody is against.



I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.


Only bugs are backported, except (very rare) exceptions



Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
release branch.


And if everybody is OK. A veto can block a commit (not a release) but that must 
be justified:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html



If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
the release branch was created.


Yes that's it. We could maybe slightly change this sentence to explain that 
very important improvements may be rarely backported.



I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
weeds of discussion.


Exactly, the devil is in the details and we get sometimes lost.




Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?


That need to be discussed IMO. With clear cases, like OFBIZ-9350 but not only.
We still need to find and agree about possible other cases I guess, hence 3 
weeks being short to me.



As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder
that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test
burden before a public release can be made?


I prefer that we openly discuss that here (dev ML) before allowing improvements 
in release branches.

I hope I'm clear :)

Thanks

Jacques




Thanks,

Dan.

On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux
wrote:


What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where
the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words,
apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
"new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
then
what is a blocker bug, only security?

Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that
we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html

HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Hi Pranay,

OK, but then only that? So far we backported any bug. So we would release a 
branch with bugs in?

Le 07/05/2024 à 16:42, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

what is a blocker bug, only security?
I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the process
level.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:


What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where
the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words,
apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
"new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
then
what is a blocker bug, only security?

Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that
we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html

HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on
the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller

changes

are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for
existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will

help

in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue

the

discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the

OFBiz

development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hello all,

I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are

in

this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we

are

probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.

Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it

seems

there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
branch.

Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming

OFBiz

release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a

case-by-case

basis.

Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to

denote

the commit that was publicly released.

I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed

releases in

the past.

The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch.

It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of
Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now

might

be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from

trunk.

Thanks,

Dan.

On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux <

jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com

wrote:


Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely? And that are their situations?

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely?

And WHAT are their situations?

Sorry, typo



--
Daniel Watford



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Pranay Pandey
Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of creating a new release.

After we create a new release, IMO we shouldn't be committing any new
features there.

This is critical that we limit the scope of release with ongoing
development in the trunk.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 20:31, Daniel Watford  wrote:

> Hi Jacques,
>
> I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
> difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?
>
> Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
> trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
> feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?
>
> I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
> sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
> but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
> the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.
>
> I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
> release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
> Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
> we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
> very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
> release branch.
>
> If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
> stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
> https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
> branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
> the release branch was created.
>
> I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
> weeds of discussion.
>
> Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
> the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
> features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?
>
> As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
> shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder
> that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test
> burden before a public release can be made?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dan.
>
> On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux  >
> wrote:
>
> > What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx
> where
> > the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other
> words,
> > apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
> > "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
> > then
> > what is a blocker bug, only security?
> >
> > Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches
> that
> > we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
> > https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> > Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :
> > > Dear Daniel,
> > >
> > > Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I
> liked
> > > the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
> > > address blockers for the upcoming release.
> > >
> > > I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working
> on
> > > the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
> > > releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller
> > changes
> > > are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration
> for
> > > existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
> > > features introduced.
> > >
> > > I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will
> > help
> > > in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue
> > the
> > > discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the
> > OFBiz
> > > development community.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Pranay Pandey
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello all,
> > >>
> > >> I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are
> > in
> > >> this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we
> > are
> > >> probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.
> > >>
> > >> Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it
> > seems
> > >> there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the
> trunk
> > >> branch.
> > >>
> > >> Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk,
> named
> > >> something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
> > >> address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming
> > OFBiz
> > >> release. New features would not normally be applied to the
> release-24.05
> > >> branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a
> > case-by-case
> > >> basis.
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Daniel Watford
Hi Jacques,

I'm sorry, but I can't quite parse your question, 'What is the
difference...'.   Could you restate it another way?

Are you asking what the difference is between enforcing a feature-freeze on
trunk versus continuing to allow all changes to trunk whilst having a
feature-freeze on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x)?

I think it will be very difficult to define a prescriptive policy on what
sort of fixes might be permitted on a release branch (e.g. release-24.x),
but the availability of committers to do the work of applying patches to
the branch might help us reach a de facto policy.

I personally would want to avoid backporting changes from trunk to a
release branch without good reason since I view this as duplicate work.
Therefore I would only want to backport fixes from trunk to release where
we have a defect that impacts users or if we felt that some new feature was
very very very important to OFBiz that it couldn't wait for the future
release branch.

If it helps, the project has used the phrase 'This series has been
stabilized with bug fixes since' on the Release History page:
https://downloads.apache.org/ofbiz/. I would interpret this as the release
branch was used to *stabilise* the features that were in trunk at the time
the release branch was created.

I fear that we all might be roughly in agreement but getting lost in the
weeds of discussion.

Should we go ahead and create a release-24.05 branch from trunk soon for
the purpose of stabilising a future release? Or are there any important
features that OFBiz developers want to see in trunk first?

As far as which commits are later applied to the release-24.05 branch,
shall we leave that up to the committers at the time, but with a reminder
that adding new features on the release-24.05 branch will increase the test
burden before a public release can be made?

Thanks,

Dan.

On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 15:20, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:

> What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where
> the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words,
> apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
> "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
> then
> what is a blocker bug, only security?
>
> Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that
> we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
> https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html
>
> HTH
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :
> > Dear Daniel,
> >
> > Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
> > the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
> > address blockers for the upcoming release.
> >
> > I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on
> > the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
> > releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller
> changes
> > are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for
> > existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
> > features introduced.
> >
> > I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will
> help
> > in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue
> the
> > discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the
> OFBiz
> > development community.
> >
> > Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pranay Pandey
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are
> in
> >> this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we
> are
> >> probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.
> >>
> >> Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it
> seems
> >> there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
> >> branch.
> >>
> >> Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
> >> something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
> >> address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming
> OFBiz
> >> release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
> >> branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a
> case-by-case
> >> basis.
> >>
> >> Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
> >> once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
> >> release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to
> denote
> >> the commit that was publicly released.
> >>
> >> I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed
> releases in
> >> the past.
> >>
> >> The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
> >> process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
> >> decide 

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Pranay Pandey
Hi Jacques,

what is a blocker bug, only security?
I think it should also include anything broken on the UI or at the process
level.

Best regards,
Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 19:48, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:

> What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where
> the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words,
> apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the
> "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And
> then
> what is a blocker bug, only security?
>
> Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that
> we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind:
> https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html
>
> HTH
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :
> > Dear Daniel,
> >
> > Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
> > the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
> > address blockers for the upcoming release.
> >
> > I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on
> > the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
> > releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller
> changes
> > are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for
> > existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
> > features introduced.
> >
> > I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will
> help
> > in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue
> the
> > discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the
> OFBiz
> > development community.
> >
> > Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pranay Pandey
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are
> in
> >> this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we
> are
> >> probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.
> >>
> >> Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it
> seems
> >> there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
> >> branch.
> >>
> >> Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
> >> something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
> >> address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming
> OFBiz
> >> release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
> >> branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a
> case-by-case
> >> basis.
> >>
> >> Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
> >> once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
> >> release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to
> denote
> >> the commit that was publicly released.
> >>
> >> I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed
> releases in
> >> the past.
> >>
> >> The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
> >> process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
> >> decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch.
> >>
> >> It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of
> >> Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now
> might
> >> be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from
> trunk.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Dan.
> >>
> >> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>  BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks
> >>> precisely? And that are their situations?
> >>>
> >>> BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks
> >> precisely?
> >>> And WHAT are their situations?
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, typo
> >>>
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Daniel Watford
> >>


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Jacques Le Roux
What is the difference between freezing the trunk in a release-24.xx where the rule is no improvements but if a consensus agrees with? In other words, 
apart exceptions only bugs and not only blockers,as we did so far and the "new" proposition? Do we really wants to backport only blockerbugs? And then 
what is a blocker bug, only security?


Somehow related, I also remember we freezed the trunk in few branches that we never released. 14.12 and 15.12 come to mind: 
https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html


HTH

Jacques

Le 07/05/2024 à 15:11, Pranay Pandey a écrit :

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on
the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller changes
are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for
existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will help
in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue the
discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the OFBiz
development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:


Hello all,

I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are in
this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we are
probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.

Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it seems
there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
branch.

Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming OFBiz
release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a case-by-case
basis.

Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to denote
the commit that was publicly released.

I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed releases in
the past.

The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch.

It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of
Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now might
be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from trunk.

Thanks,

Dan.

On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux 
Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely? And that are their situations?

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks

precisely?

And WHAT are their situations?

Sorry, typo



--
Daniel Watford


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Pranay Pandey
Dear Daniel,

Thank you for outlining the proposed release strategy for OFBiz. I liked
the idea of creating a new branch from trunk named 'release-24.05' to
address blockers for the upcoming release.

I agree with Michael's proposal that targeting a release while working on
the trunk is worth considering. Maintaining a consistent flow of new
releases is crucial for project success. New releases with smaller changes
are not only easier to adopt but also facilitate a smoother migration for
existing ERP implementations, especially if users find value in the new
features introduced.

I believe this approach aligns well with the project's goals and will help
in ensuring a structured and efficient release process. Let's continue the
discussion on how we can further enhance this strategy to benefit the OFBiz
development community.

Thank you for your efforts in driving this conversation forward.

Best regards,

Pranay Pandey


On Tue, 7 May 2024 at 13:36, Daniel Watford  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are in
> this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we are
> probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.
>
> Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it seems
> there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
> branch.
>
> Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
> something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
> address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming OFBiz
> release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
> branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a case-by-case
> basis.
>
> Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
> once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
> release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to denote
> the commit that was publicly released.
>
> I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed releases in
> the past.
>
> The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
> process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
> decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch.
>
> It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of
> Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now might
> be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from trunk.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dan.
>
> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux  >
> wrote:
>
> > Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > > BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks
> > precisely? And that are their situations?
> >
> > BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks
> precisely?
> > And WHAT are their situations?
> >
> > Sorry, typo
> >
> >
>
> --
> Daniel Watford
>


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-07 Thread Daniel Watford
Hello all,

I'm a little confused by what the differences in opinions actually are in
this thread. I think this is because the differences are minor and we are
probably close to an agreement on how to proceed.

Although there are not many of us involved in this conversation, it seems
there is a desire to NOT impose any sort of feature freeze on the trunk
branch.

Instead we take the approach of creating a new branch from trunk, named
something like 'release-24.05'. The purpose of this new branch is to
address any issues that might be considered blockers for an upcoming OFBiz
release. New features would not normally be applied to the release-24.05
branch, but exceptions to this rule would be considered on a case-by-case
basis.

Issues blocking an OFBiz 24.05.xx release would be tracked in Jira, and
once addressed the release would be made public. A suitable tag - e.g.
release-24.05.01 - would be applied to the release-24.05 branch to denote
the commit that was publicly released.

I believe the above describes how the OFBiz project has managed releases in
the past.

The discussions around a road map are orthogonal to the above release
process, but would definitely help the OFBiz development community/PMC
decide when would be an appropriate time to create a new release branch.

It seems like the major project undertakings - such as the movement of
Groovy Scripts within the source tree - have been completed, so now might
be a good time to go ahead and create the release-24.05 branch from trunk.

Thanks,

Dan.

On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 18:01, Jacques Le Roux 
wrote:

> Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks
> precisely? And that are their situations?
>
> BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks precisely?
> And WHAT are their situations?
>
> Sorry, typo
>
>

-- 
Daniel Watford


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-06 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Le 06/05/2024 à 18:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks precisely? And that are their situations? 


BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks precisely? And 
WHAT are their situations?

Sorry, typo



Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-06 Thread Jacques Le Roux

BTW, to avoid to speak in the void. Again, what are those tasks precisely? And 
that are their situations?

Le 06/05/2024 à 18:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Stephen,

As I can see it, because of the number of people really involved in such tasks.

Jacques

Le 06/05/2024 à 17:45, Stephen Davidson a écrit :

Good afternoon.

Maybe I am missing something, but why can't WIP be executed finished & 
stabilized on the Release Branch and then merged to Trunk?

Regards,
Steve

On 5/6/24 04:07, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi,

We should 1st clearly identify WIPs in trunk and at which stage they are each.

We can't wait and complicate the situation before that.

Jacques

Le 06/05/2024 à 10:36, gil.portenseigne a écrit :

Hi,

I feel like Michael, when there are 'in progress' work in trunk, when we
create a release branch for stabilisation, the remaining work of such
task will only be in trunk (since those are improvements).

But delaying release is not good when we look at the name of our last
release that show the 2018 year.

The concession we could agree on should be to identify such tasks to let
user know the partial improvements contained in the release.

i.e. creating release branch + roadmap :)

WDYT ?

Gil
On 22/04/24 04:12, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi Guys,

Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your propositions. I 
can't see why we would change our very simple way of doing.

When we freeze a branch, the activity can continue on trunk. It does not 
interfere with the new release branch.
The only variable is the period we allow before releasing the branch. Then, 
that depends on the breaking changes (or not) we recently made.

Why should we change? I fear it will rather introduce complications. Please 
keep it simple.

TIA for your explanations on simple reasons to change : what is wrong with our 
current way of doing?

Jacques

Le 22/04/2024 à 09:37, Daniel Watford a écrit :

Hi Michael,

I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
different 'shape' to the approach.

I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x release
branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work (backporting)
that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier in the
year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.

Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x branch to
use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases along that
branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts migration
- have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that would have
to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.

>From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly releases. I
think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of major new
functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to become
generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
intended proposal! :)

Yes to a roadmap.

Thanks,

Dan.


On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.

In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
release branch 24.x in due time.

I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.

I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
together to reach those project goals.

For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
release branch which introduces those features.

I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.

What do you think?

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.

Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-06 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Hi Stephen,

As I can see it, because of the number of people really involved in such tasks.

Jacques

Le 06/05/2024 à 17:45, Stephen Davidson a écrit :

Good afternoon.

Maybe I am missing something, but why can't WIP be executed finished & 
stabilized on the Release Branch and then merged to Trunk?

Regards,
Steve

On 5/6/24 04:07, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi,

We should 1st clearly identify WIPs in trunk and at which stage they are each.

We can't wait and complicate the situation before that.

Jacques

Le 06/05/2024 à 10:36, gil.portenseigne a écrit :

Hi,

I feel like Michael, when there are 'in progress' work in trunk, when we
create a release branch for stabilisation, the remaining work of such
task will only be in trunk (since those are improvements).

But delaying release is not good when we look at the name of our last
release that show the 2018 year.

The concession we could agree on should be to identify such tasks to let
user know the partial improvements contained in the release.

i.e. creating release branch + roadmap :)

WDYT ?

Gil
On 22/04/24 04:12, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi Guys,

Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your propositions. I 
can't see why we would change our very simple way of doing.

When we freeze a branch, the activity can continue on trunk. It does not 
interfere with the new release branch.
The only variable is the period we allow before releasing the branch. Then, 
that depends on the breaking changes (or not) we recently made.

Why should we change? I fear it will rather introduce complications. Please 
keep it simple.

TIA for your explanations on simple reasons to change : what is wrong with our 
current way of doing?

Jacques

Le 22/04/2024 à 09:37, Daniel Watford a écrit :

Hi Michael,

I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
different 'shape' to the approach.

I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x release
branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work (backporting)
that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier in the
year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.

Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x branch to
use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases along that
branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts migration
- have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that would have
to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.

>From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly releases. I
think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of major new
functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to become
generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
intended proposal! :)

Yes to a roadmap.

Thanks,

Dan.


On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.

In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
release branch 24.x in due time.

I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.

I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
together to reach those project goals.

For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
release branch which introduces those features.

I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.

What do you think?

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de









Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-06 Thread Stephen Davidson

Good afternoon.

Maybe I am missing something, but why can't WIP be executed finished & 
stabilized on the Release Branch and then merged to Trunk?


Regards,
Steve

On 5/6/24 04:07, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi,

We should 1st clearly identify WIPs in trunk and at which stage they 
are each.


We can't wait and complicate the situation before that.

Jacques

Le 06/05/2024 à 10:36, gil.portenseigne a écrit :

Hi,

I feel like Michael, when there are 'in progress' work in trunk, when we
create a release branch for stabilisation, the remaining work of such
task will only be in trunk (since those are improvements).

But delaying release is not good when we look at the name of our last
release that show the 2018 year.

The concession we could agree on should be to identify such tasks to let
user know the partial improvements contained in the release.

i.e. creating release branch + roadmap :)

WDYT ?

Gil
On 22/04/24 04:12, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi Guys,

Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your 
propositions. I can't see why we would change our very simple way of 
doing.


When we freeze a branch, the activity can continue on trunk. It does 
not interfere with the new release branch.
The only variable is the period we allow before releasing the 
branch. Then, that depends on the breaking changes (or not) we 
recently made.


Why should we change? I fear it will rather introduce complications. 
Please keep it simple.


TIA for your explanations on simple reasons to change : what is 
wrong with our current way of doing?


Jacques

Le 22/04/2024 à 09:37, Daniel Watford a écrit :

Hi Michael,

I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
different 'shape' to the approach.

I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x 
release
branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work 
(backporting)
that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier 
in the

year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.

Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x 
branch to
use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases 
along that
branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts 
migration
- have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that 
would have

to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.

>From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly 
releases. I
think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of 
major new
functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to 
become

generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
intended proposal! :)

Yes to a roadmap.

Thanks,

Dan.


On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes 
going

into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, 
potentially

leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.

In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a 
stable

release branch 24.x in due time.

I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new 
features and
improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x 
branch.


I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the 
community
some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be 
expected
in the next release branches. It might also give developers some 
goals

to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
together to reach those project goals.

For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which 
we can
assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 
25.x

release branch which introduces those features.

I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap 
and be
discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, 
just
to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time 
periods.


What do you think?

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de









OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-06 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Hi,

We should 1st clearly identify WIPs in trunk and at which stage they are each.

We can't wait and complicate the situation before that.

Jacques

Le 06/05/2024 à 10:36, gil.portenseigne a écrit :

Hi,

I feel like Michael, when there are 'in progress' work in trunk, when we
create a release branch for stabilisation, the remaining work of such
task will only be in trunk (since those are improvements).

But delaying release is not good when we look at the name of our last
release that show the 2018 year.

The concession we could agree on should be to identify such tasks to let
user know the partial improvements contained in the release.

i.e. creating release branch + roadmap :)

WDYT ?

Gil
On 22/04/24 04:12, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Hi Guys,

Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your propositions. I 
can't see why we would change our very simple way of doing.

When we freeze a branch, the activity can continue on trunk. It does not 
interfere with the new release branch.
The only variable is the period we allow before releasing the branch. Then, 
that depends on the breaking changes (or not) we recently made.

Why should we change? I fear it will rather introduce complications. Please 
keep it simple.

TIA for your explanations on simple reasons to change : what is wrong with our 
current way of doing?

Jacques

Le 22/04/2024 à 09:37, Daniel Watford a écrit :

Hi Michael,

I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
different 'shape' to the approach.

I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x release
branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work (backporting)
that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier in the
year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.

Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x branch to
use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases along that
branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts migration
- have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that would have
to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.

>From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly releases. I
think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of major new
functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to become
generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
intended proposal! :)

Yes to a roadmap.

Thanks,

Dan.


On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.

In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
release branch 24.x in due time.

I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.

I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
together to reach those project goals.

For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
release branch which introduces those features.

I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.

What do you think?

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de





Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-06 Thread gil.portenseigne
Hi,

I feel like Michael, when there are 'in progress' work in trunk, when we
create a release branch for stabilisation, the remaining work of such
task will only be in trunk (since those are improvements).

But delaying release is not good when we look at the name of our last
release that show the 2018 year.

The concession we could agree on should be to identify such tasks to let
user know the partial improvements contained in the release.

i.e. creating release branch + roadmap :)

WDYT ?

Gil
On 22/04/24 04:12, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
> Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your propositions. I 
> can't see why we would change our very simple way of doing.
> 
> When we freeze a branch, the activity can continue on trunk. It does not 
> interfere with the new release branch.
> The only variable is the period we allow before releasing the branch. Then, 
> that depends on the breaking changes (or not) we recently made.
> 
> Why should we change? I fear it will rather introduce complications. Please 
> keep it simple.
> 
> TIA for your explanations on simple reasons to change : what is wrong with 
> our current way of doing?
> 
> Jacques
> 
> Le 22/04/2024 à 09:37, Daniel Watford a écrit :
> > Hi Michael,
> > 
> > I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
> > different 'shape' to the approach.
> > 
> > I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x release
> > branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work (backporting)
> > that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier in the
> > year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
> > mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.
> > 
> > Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x branch to
> > use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases along that
> > branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts migration
> > - have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that would have
> > to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.
> > 
> > >From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly releases. I
> > think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of major new
> > functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to become
> > generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
> > temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
> > branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
> > instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
> > intended proposal! :)
> > 
> > Yes to a roadmap.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Dan.
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi everyone,
> > > 
> > > we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
> > > 24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
> > > changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
> > > into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
> > > This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
> > > leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.
> > > 
> > > In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
> > > release branch 24.x in due time.
> > > 
> > > I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
> > > improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.
> > > 
> > > I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
> > > some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
> > > in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
> > > to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
> > > together to reach those project goals.
> > > 
> > > For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
> > > introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
> > > assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
> > > release branch which introduces those features.
> > > 
> > > I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
> > > always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
> > > discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
> > > to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > 
> > > Michael Brohl
> > > 
> > > ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-05-02 Thread Nicolas Malin

Hello,

Why don't create the release branch now ?

Nicolas

Le 21/04/2024 à 15:49, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi everyone,

we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a 
24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which 
changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes 
going into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the 
codebase. This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, 
potentially leading to delay the creation of the next release branch 
even more.


In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a 
stable release branch 24.x in due time.


I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features 
and improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x 
branch.


I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the 
community some guidelines where to focus and which main features can 
be expected in the next release branches. It might also give 
developers some goals to provide the features according to planned 
releases and maybe work together to reach those project goals.


For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration, 
introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we 
can assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 
25.x release branch which introduces those features.


I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can 
always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and 
be discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, 
just to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time 
periods.


What do you think?

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de






Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-04-22 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Le 22/04/2024 à 16:12, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your propositions.

I start writing that. Maybe I should rather have started by saying that I don't 
understand why we should change our (simple) way of doing.


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-04-22 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Hi Guys,

Without getting into details, I tend to disagree with your propositions. I 
can't see why we would change our very simple way of doing.

When we freeze a branch, the activity can continue on trunk. It does not 
interfere with the new release branch.
The only variable is the period we allow before releasing the branch. Then, 
that depends on the breaking changes (or not) we recently made.

Why should we change? I fear it will rather introduce complications. Please 
keep it simple.

TIA for your explanations on simple reasons to change : what is wrong with our 
current way of doing?

Jacques

Le 22/04/2024 à 09:37, Daniel Watford a écrit :

Hi Michael,

I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
different 'shape' to the approach.

I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x release
branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work (backporting)
that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier in the
year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.

Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x branch to
use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases along that
branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts migration
- have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that would have
to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.

>From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly releases. I
think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of major new
functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to become
generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
intended proposal! :)

Yes to a roadmap.

Thanks,

Dan.


On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
wrote:


Hi everyone,

we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.

In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
release branch 24.x in due time.

I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.

I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
together to reach those project goals.

For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
release branch which introduces those features.

I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.

What do you think?

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de





Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-04-22 Thread Daniel Watford
Hi Michael,

I'm broadly in favour of your proposal, but perhaps with a slightly
different 'shape' to the approach.

I too was hoping that we could freeze trunk before creating a 24.x release
branch as I was concerned about the about of duplicate work (backporting)
that might need to be done if we took a 24.x release branch earlier in the
year, but alas trunk marches on and I think it will be difficult to
mandate a period of release-related-only changes in trunk.

Instead I think, as Deepak mentioned, we should take a new 24.x branch to
use for stabilisation - with tags denoting the actual releases along that
branch. It feels that the large projects - such as groovy-scripts migration
- have completed which should reduce the amount of rework that would have
to take place simultaneously on trunk and the 24.x release branch.

>From your comments I infer that you may be suggesting yearly releases. I
think this is a good idea as it will allow the introduction of major new
functionalities in trunk without needing to wait years for them to become
generally accessible. Without more frequent releases we will have the
temptation to port major functionality into already existing release
branches which might take a large amount of effort and could introduce
instability between minor releases. I hope my inference reflects your
intended proposal! :)

Yes to a roadmap.

Thanks,

Dan.


On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 at 14:50, Michael Brohl 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
> 24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
> changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
> into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
> This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
> leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.
>
> In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
> release branch 24.x in due time.
>
> I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
> improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.
>
> I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
> some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
> in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
> to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
> together to reach those project goals.
>
> For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
> introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
> assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
> release branch which introduces those features.
>
> I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
> always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
> discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
> to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael Brohl
>
> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>
>
>

-- 
Daniel Watford


Re: [PROPOSAL] freeze trunk for new features in favor of a release 24.x branch preparation / future roadmap

2024-04-21 Thread Deepak Dixit
Sounds good to me!!

I wanted to propose a change in process regarding the stabilization of code
releases.

Instead of restricting commits directly to the trunk, I suggest creating a
branch named "24.04" or "24.05" (depending on the release version)
specifically for stabilization purposes. This branch will serve as a
dedicated space for stabilizing the code without impacting ongoing work in
the trunk.

By implementing this approach, we can focus on stabilizing the release
branch independently while allowing continuous development to proceed on
the trunk. The only additional overhead will be the need to backport bug
fixes from the release branch to the trunk or vice versa.

I believe this strategy will help us maintain a more organized and
efficient development workflow, ensuring that our releases are stable and
reliable without disrupting ongoing development efforts.

Thanks & Regards
--
Deepak Dixit
ofbiz.apache.org


On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 7:20 PM Michael Brohl 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> we agreed to work towards a stabilizing trunk to be able to create a
> 24.x release branch, which means we have to thoroughly decide which
> changes should go into trunk. There are currently lots of changes going
> into trunk with PR's created and rapidly be merged into the codebase.
> This causes potential for errors being introduced in trunk, potentially
> leading to delay the creation of the next release branch even more.
>
> In my opinion, this is contraproductive to the goal of creating a stable
> release branch 24.x in due time.
>
> I propose to make a decision to have a code freeze for new features and
> improvements and focus on bug fixes until we have created a 24.x branch.
>
> I also propose that we start organizing a roadmap to give the community
> some guidelines where to focus and which main features can be expected
> in the next release branches. It might also give developers some goals
> to provide the features according to planned releases and maybe work
> together to reach those project goals.
>
> For example, there are some initiatives for Tomcat migration,
> introducing REST functionality in the framework and others which we can
> assign to future release branches. Maybe we can have a plan for a 25.x
> release branch which introduces those features.
>
> I do not intend to make this an unflexible roadmap, means there can
> always be more planned/unplanned features be added to the roadmap and be
> discussed. We should have some deadlines for new features though, just
> to be able to create the next feature branch in the planned time periods.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael Brohl
>
> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>
>
>