ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David E Jones <d...@me.com>
Subject Re: Contributor branch Proposal, was: Contributor branches https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributors+Branch+proposal was: Attaching files to a product
Date Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:39:09 GMT

This looks like more of a separate repository than a branch of OFBiz.

First off, the term "branch" just doesn't apply. A branch of a source repository is effectively
a copy of the repo that can be changed separately and is meant to eventually be merged back
into the trunk. If a branch is not meant to be merged back into the trunk, it is a fork.

What you're describing isn't even a fork as it doesn't sound like it would be a copy of OFBiz
that is changed separately, but rather a repository for add-on modules.

Also, it sounds like it would best be done outside of the ASF, especially if you don't want
a vote where PMC votes are binding... that's all there is at the ASF.

For those interested, why not just create a sourceforge or google code project and share commit
access with others who are interested? There is nothing that says OFBiz add-on modules have
to be part of the project, or that people can't create separate projects to do such things.
If various people want to work together to do so, from the community spirit perspective...
all the better!

-David


On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:11 AM, BJ Freeman wrote:

> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributors+Branch+proposal 
> 
> David E Jones sent the following on 7/15/2010 9:03 AM:
>> 
>> Hans,
>> 
>> How would you create such a branch, or what would that look like? Who would be able
to commit to it?
>> 
>> -David
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 15, 2010, at 2:59 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> 
>>> Shouldn't we do a proof of concept?
>>> 
>>> I will volunteer to create and update a new branch for BJ to start and
>>> everyone who would like to contribute. When the people on this branch
>>> say they are ready we can judge what is there and/or provide suggestions
>>> for enhancement.
>>> 
>>> After general consensus the branch will be merged into the trunk.
>>> 
>>> Any comments?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 18:21 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Contributors+Branch+proposal
>>>> 
>>>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 7/9/2010 11:07 PM:
>>>>> I am writing a proposal for Contributors branch.
>>>>> some of the points are:
>>>>> 1)components not continued to be supported in the specialpurpose get
>>>>> move to the contributors branch till interest is renewed.
>>>>> this would simplify maintaining the trunk but allow people to pull it
>>>>> down if they want to work on it.
>>>>> 2)there is no guarantee of the ofbiz community support of the
>>>>> contributions.
>>>>> 3)people can test the contribution and may vote to include it in the
trunk.
>>>>> 4)it gives one place to make sure all contributions are integrated with
>>>>> the latest trunk and each other without effecting the trunk.
>>>>> 
>>>>> it puzzles me that it is ok open a branch to collorate, but when
>>>>> opportunity to have a lot of contributions avalible that would spread
>>>>> Ofbiz acceptance you bulk. under you logic that it can be done elsewhere
>>>>> why not do the same for Hippo.
>>>>> I would be interested in your reasons why besides it can be elsewhere.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Scott Gray sent the following on 7/9/2010 10:27 PM:
>>>>>> What need would contributor branches meet that can't already be met
>>>>>> using the likes of sourceforge, google code or github?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regarding your other statements, at some point Hans you are going
to
>>>>>> need to ask yourself why it is mostly only your commits that cause
so
>>>>>> much negative discussion. Everyone else seems to work together just
>>>>>> fine for the most part. I'm not saying it's all your fault but you
>>>>>> can't just blame everyone else for these problems and ignore your
own
>>>>>> contribution to them.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 10/07/2010, at 2:54 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have the same opinion as you BJ, even as a committer it is
too much
>>>>>>> problem contributing because of the number of technical people
in the
>>>>>>> PMC which often only judge on technical qualities and making
the system
>>>>>>> technically as difficult as possible.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The current discussion (not really sure if it is one) between
Adrian and
>>>>>>> me is a good example.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think it would be a good idea to have contributor branches.
Other PMC
>>>>>>> members who would support this?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To be honest i think that you should try to become a committer,
i know
>>>>>>> why you did not accept in the past, but please reconsider.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 18:33 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>> my goal has always been to have this ofbiz do this. it has
never
>>>>>>>> been my
>>>>>>>> intent to have a seperate ofbiz. Nor am I promoting mine.
>>>>>>>> my problem up to now has been acceptance and resources.
>>>>>>>> I see the winds changing on acceptance and I have gotten
the resources.
>>>>>>>> if you note I suggest years ago to have contributor branches.
>>>>>>>> Had that happened I would have contributed to it instead
of create
>>>>>>>> mine.
>>>>>>>> I see the equivalent of contributor branch happening more
like the
>>>>>>>> Current Hippo branch.
>>>>>>>> so if someone wants to open a branch I can just submit to,
it would be
>>>>>>>> faster, however i am happy to provide Jiras.
>>>>>>>> so if the Jiras I put patches in are accepted then the ofbiz
will work
>>>>>>>> the same as the one I have.
>>>>>>>> Note my first major move to accomplish this
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3852
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Scott Gray sent the following on 7/9/2010 5:18 PM:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/07/2010, at 1:06 AM, BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> a product is more of a marketing item
>>>>>>>>>> a part is a description of a function
>>>>>>>>>> they vary for engineering and manufacturing. Engineering
does not
>>>>>>>>>> assign a commercial product to the part where manufacture
may list
>>>>>>>>>> many actual purchase parts that will never be sold
individually.
>>>>>>>>>> I see in the model book the one I implemented is
the alternative
>>>>>>>>>> and more extensive model.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Congratulations, where can I download a copy of this
BJBiz? Please
>>>>>>>>> try and keep in mind that we are discussing OFBiz in
this mailing
>>>>>>>>> list, not your derivative of it.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Scott Gray sent the following on 7/5/2010 5:53 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>> In OFBiz a Part is a Product, so what is your
point?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/07/2010, at 12:16 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish to be able to have our engineers link
plans to parts
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> =========================
>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman<http://bjfreeman.elance.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> BTW your quoting is terrible, I never made the
statement below
>>>>>>>>>>>> Scott Gray sent the following on 7/5/2010
5:02 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wish to be able to have our engineers
link plans to parts
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
>>>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak
>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
>>> 
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message