Done
Jacques
Le 13/04/2017 à 16:05, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
OK, I assume nobody is again setting a policy for committers to maintain plugins. As a 1st step I'll suggest the way I do it for now. When we will
have better ways we will update
I'll change this page
OK, I assume nobody is again setting a policy for committers to maintain plugins. As a 1st step I'll suggest the way I do it for now. When we will
have better ways we will update
I'll change this page
Ah forgot to say that with the (very simple and logical) way I use, and have exposed in my answer to Jacopo, you can't commit in framework and plugins
at the same time.
Jacques
Le 12/04/2017 à 12:12, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Thanks Taher,
I agree, and this indeed begins to clarify things
Thanks Taher,
I agree, and this indeed begins to clarify things
Jacques
Le 12/04/2017 à 12:09, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
Hmmm, I think maybe there might be a mix-up between treating the products
as separate and not-maintaining plugins.
In the discussion in the referenced thread, I mentioned
Hmmm, I think maybe there might be a mix-up between treating the products
as separate and not-maintaining plugins.
In the discussion in the referenced thread, I mentioned that the plugins
should be a separate product as in having their own separate build system
and release strategy. This does not
Le 12/04/2017 à 08:49, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
[...]
7. Investigate and propose a methodology for maintaining plugins and
versioning compatibility with OFBiz.
I think the easiest way to implement
Actually it's only about a policy to support plugins with a clear how-to
documentation.
We can start that right now. We need to clarify that plugins deserve the same
attention than the framework and committers need to be aware of it.
Jacques
Le 12/04/2017 à 08:59, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
I think starting any vote right now might be a little premature. I list
below what I propose as the logical sequence of steps to take:
- Create a maven repo for OFBiz plugins
- Update the plugins API to be able to pull and push to that repo
- Allow contributors some time to get familiar, fix
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> [...]
7. Investigate and propose a methodology for maintaining plugins and
> versioning compatibility with OFBiz.
>
I think the easiest way to implement for now is to maintain one trunk for
both
Mmm, I realise my last message is ambiguous.
I mean, should I start a vote?
Without any answers I'll assume it's a lazy consensus
Thanks
Jacques
Le 12/04/2017 à 08:24, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Hi,
Without any reactions, and because I believe this is important I'll start a vote
If I get
Hi,
Without any reactions, and because I believe this is important I'll start a vote
If I get no attention at all, I'll consider this is a lazy consensus and will
enforce this rule in the committers page in wiki
Thanks
Jacques
Le 14/03/2017 à 08:25, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
To sum up and
To sum up and as a kind of TL;DR, the question is <>
Jacques
Le 14/03/2017 à 08:17, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Hi,
In recent discussions I wrote
> in <<[DISCUSSION] Plugins: svn:external or Gradle Task?)>> thread
> in <<[proposal] actions to take with plugins>> thread
Hi,
In recent discussions I wrote
> in <<[DISCUSSION] Plugins: svn:external or Gradle Task?)>> thread
<>
in <<[proposal] actions to take with plugins>> thread
but got no attention so far.
Beside the last pending technical aspects defined in the <<[DISCUSSION] Proposed Task List
13 matches
Mail list logo
