[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3366?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Awdesh Singh Parihar updated OFBIZ-3366:
Attachment: OFBIZ-3366.patch
Hello All,
As per task description I have put
Hi David,
The problem that I have with the components is that they are an all or
nothing proposition. For example, due to dependencies, I have not been able
to use the party management component on its own without first manually
removing the dependencies to other application components.
Yes, this has to be resolved 1st whatever the component, addons, OSGI bundles
or what not is used
Remember that OFBiz was 1st written as an integrated ERP, that's why there are
still some dependencies.
There were much more dependencies some years ago: WIP and, as ever, all good
wills are
Le 17/12/2009 22:46, Bruno Busco a écrit :
Having OFBiz splitted in a core framework and add-on modules seems to
me like a must if we want to improve features.
Add-on modules is how many large and popular projects are built.
Even OpenERP says to have more that 350 modules and offers different
So Neogia add ons are basically just managed patches?
Regards
Scott
On 18/12/2009, at 11:30 PM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
Le 17/12/2009 22:46, Bruno Busco a écrit :
Having OFBiz splitted in a core framework and add-on modules seems to
me like a must if we want to improve features.
Add-on
Something to note though. There is a strong difference between Neogia addons
and OFBiz components, as Erwan did just explain
Jacques
From: Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
Yes, this has to be resolved 1st whatever the component, addons, OSGI bundles
or what not is used
Remember
Le 18/12/2009 11:44, Scott Gray a écrit :
So Neogia add ons are basically just managed patches?
Basically yes. But, if you go deeper in the addons, there are :
improved patchs : if two addons are modifying the same file, both
patches are applied one after the other.
versioning
dependancies
workeffort calendar bug when no demo data is installed
--
Key: OFBIZ-3368
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3368
Project: OFBiz
Issue Type: Bug
Components:
CLONE -The following required parameter is missing: [OUT]
[createQuoteWorkEffort.quoteId]
-
Key: OFBIZ-3369
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3369
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3369?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
chris snow updated OFBIZ-3369:
--
Fix Version/s: (was: SVN trunk)
Environment: (was: demo.ofbiz.org)
Affects
Application patch is atomic to be sure that an addon don't break the
OFBiz file hierarchy.
Nicolas
Erwan de FERRIERES a écrit :
Le 18/12/2009 11:44, Scott Gray a écrit :
So Neogia add ons are basically just managed patches?
Basically yes. But, if you go deeper in the addons, there are :
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3368?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12792453#action_12792453
]
chris snow commented on OFBIZ-3368:
---
The work around is to create a party using the party
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2778?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12792455#action_12792455
]
Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-2778:
Should we no close since r892218?
Alter
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3205?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12792464#action_12792464
]
Bilgin Ibryam commented on OFBIZ-3205:
--
Hi,
I also needed to validate
Hi Bilgin,
Thanks for your comments, I'm not actually against your approach and
think it is a good idea to reuse existing search functionalities.
I've had a quick look at your patch (finally) and I have to agree that
you're solution is better than mine. About the verbosity my inline
Thanks Scott for resolving this issue !
Le 10/12/2009 19:15, Anil Patel a écrit :
As of now, Its true, you need to write a method to analyze server response.
This should be improved.
../..
--
Erwan de FERRIERES
www.nereide.biz
Bilgin Ibryam wrote:
Hi all,
On the form widget I see an attribute called paginate=true/false but
it is not used at all, because its value is always overriden.
Can someone tell me what was the purpose of this attribute? I suppose
it was intended for disabling pagination and rendering all rows
very cool, Bilgin.
Is it possible to also set and pass the paginate boolean from the screen? In
this way, the same form could be used with pagination in some screens and
without pagination in other screens.
Jacopo
On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:48 PM, Bilgin Ibryam wrote:
Bilgin Ibryam wrote:
Hi
I think you misunderstand. The dependencies are not because of the component
tools, but because of the components themselves. The components in the
ofbiz/applications directory are inherently interdependent, mostly because of
the data model. If someone wanted to they could certainly make these
I forgot to mention one thing here... the fact that the applications components
are interdependent is a GOOD thing. They represent a pretty complete base data
model, services, and general UI elements. When these things are reused properly
by higher level components it can (in most cases)
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3205?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=12792571#action_12792571
]
Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-3205:
Hi Bilgin,
Apart a generic javascript
I have done some more reading on Apache 3rd party licensing and after
some careful reading, I believe that Hans' use of BIRT is acceptably
within the policy. The latest copy of the policy is available at
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html; with the key area being
Category B: Reciprocal
Ean Schuessler wrote:
I have done some more reading on Apache 3rd party licensing and after
some careful reading, I believe that Hans' use of BIRT is acceptably
within the policy. The latest copy of the policy is available at
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html; with the key area being
Thanks for your comments Ean, this is a voice of sanity IMO
On Dec 18, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
I have done some more reading on Apache 3rd party licensing and after
some careful reading, I believe that Hans' use of BIRT is acceptably
within the policy. The latest copy of
On 19/12/2009, at 9:44 AM, David E Jones wrote:
Thanks for your comments Ean, this is a voice of sanity IMO
If there is any doubt or disagreement the only sane thing to do is to
ask legal, anything else is just noise.
On Dec 18, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
I have done
On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 19/12/2009, at 9:44 AM, David E Jones wrote:
I agree with this and tried to make this point early on in the discussion.
We should be able to include these files just fine in source form, as long
as they are not modified.
You didn't try
On 19/12/2009, at 10:09 AM, David E Jones wrote:
On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 19/12/2009, at 9:44 AM, David E Jones wrote:
I agree with this and tried to make this point early on in the
discussion. We should be able to include these files just fine in
source form, as
On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:23 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 19/12/2009, at 10:09 AM, David E Jones wrote:
On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 19/12/2009, at 9:44 AM, David E Jones wrote:
I agree with this and tried to make this point early on in the discussion.
We should be able
David E Jones wrote:
Yes, I agree with you there Scott. Hans or Adam should have researched
and resolved legal questions before committing.
The person committing the code is responsible for making certain it
follows licensing guidelines. Please refer back to the SCA that we
all had to sign
Scott Gray wrote:
Selective quoting FTW?
For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF
product at runtime in source form, and for which that source is
unlikely to be changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a
standard), this action is sufficient. An example of
Adam Heath wrote:
David E Jones wrote:
Yes, I agree with you there Scott. Hans or Adam should have researched
and resolved legal questions before committing.
The person committing the code is responsible for making certain it
follows licensing guidelines. Please refer back to the SCA that
Inline...
From: Scott Gray scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com
On 19/12/2009, at 9:44 AM, David E Jones wrote:
Thanks for your comments Ean, this is a voice of sanity IMO
If there is any doubt or disagreement the only sane thing to do is to ask
legal, anything else is just noise.
So who
From: Ean Schuessler e...@brainfood.com
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: svn commit: r890175 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: ./ applications/content/ applications/content/data/ framework/
framework/base/config/ framework/birt/ framework/birt/config/
From: Scott Gray scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com
On 19/12/2009, at 10:09 AM, David E Jones wrote:
On Dec 18, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
On 19/12/2009, at 9:44 AM, David E Jones wrote:
I agree with this and tried to make this point early on in the
discussion. We should be able to
Add the possibility to sort the associated states to a country in a different
way than by geoId
---
Key: OFBIZ-3370
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3370
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3370?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marco Risaliti updated OFBIZ-3370:
--
Attachment: SortStatesByFields.patch
With this patch we could sort the list of states of a
I try to write down some ideas I have on how I would like add-on
modules in OFBiz.
-- Add-on module management --
Every module should have a name, a version, a description, an author etc.
Every module should have a list of modules from which it depends.
A module should be added to the system
On Sat, 2009-12-19 at 10:23 +1300, Scott Gray wrote:
The frustrating thing from
my point of view is that this was discussed and the code of concern
was subsequently removed from the branch but then added back in when
BIRT came into the trunk.
I used the svn merge command to move
Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
very cool, Bilgin.
Is it possible to also set and pass the paginate boolean from the screen? In
this way, the same form could be used with pagination in some screens and without
pagination in other screens.
Jacopo
Jacopo, thanks for the idea. I added this feature
Drupal uses hooks : http://api.drupal.org/api/group/hooks/7
Maybe something to get inspired by. It seems to provide good
independance between modules.
Cimballi
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Bruno Busco bruno.bu...@gmail.com wrote:
I try to write down some ideas I have on how I would like
On Dec 19, 2009, at 12:10 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
On Sat, 2009-12-19 at 10:23 +1300, Scott Gray wrote:
The frustrating thing from
my point of view is that this was discussed and the code of concern
was subsequently removed from the branch but then added back in when
BIRT came into the
41 matches
Mail list logo
