ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ron Wheeler <rwhee...@artifact-software.com>
Subject Re: Release page outdated and inconsistent.
Date Thu, 07 Aug 2014 14:38:38 GMT
On 07/08/2014 9:48 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Le 07/08/2014 14:19, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>> On 06/08/2014 5:18 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> My only concern about the versioning pattern is that it looks to be 
>> non-standard and does not follow the practice of other Apache products.
> Yes I know, I'm the one who pushed for this versioning pattern, which 
> follows the Ubuntu way.
> The idea is with a year and month in the release version you have more 
> information than in something like 7.0.75, you know when it has been 
> freezed
> Each ASF project is free to use its own versioning pattern
>> I am trying to point out that the documentation is inconsistent 
>> within the page and seems not to match reality.
>> It needs to be updated by someone who knows the truth and can fix the 
>> places where it needs it.
> I know the truth :p.
> And nothing need to be fixed
> You can apologize, I'll not mind :p
I don't owe anyone an apology since I wrote nothing that was directed 
against anyone but were comments on the project documentation from a new 
System Administrator's point of view.
The version description is obscure to someone outside the project and 
needs to be fixed.
However, if you feel that anything that I wrote was directed against 
you, I apologize for leaving you with that impression.

>> If pointing out errors or shortcomings in the documentation is 
>> "ranting". I will try to "rant" as constructively as possible.
> Yes thanks, but be sure to understand before, else you will get some 
> other RTFMs

I am probably a good target reader.
- Native English speaker
- Undergraduate and graduate degrees in Computer Science with 40 years 
of experience with about 20+ of it as System administrator (mostly 
Linux) and lead software developer (Java, MySQL, Spring).
I have a pretty good idea about the documentation required to have a 
smooth installation and operation.
If I can not understand the docs, then they need probably need to be 

I think that my comments on the installation were accurate and did 
result in missing information being added to the docs.
I hope that my comments on the Download page will help other new System 
Administrators understand the release structure more easily.

I appreciate that it is difficult to write documentation when the author 
is an expert in the topic.
It is hard to put oneself into the mindset of someone who knows nothing 
about the product or the discussions that have gone into the design and 
is trying to learn everything that they need to know from written docs.


> Jacques
>> Ron
>>> Jacques
>>> Le 06/08/2014 21:18, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
>>>> The page should be changed to reflect the actual policy.
>>>> 13.07 seems like an odd way to number the first release of the 13 
>>>> major version. I don't see it in the distribution page.
>>>> I certainly makes it more difficult to understand and makes it 
>>>> harder to use any of the Maven Release tools
>>>> I guess that it does put some pressure on the PMC to get stuff done 
>>>> since the second digit has to be selected at the start of the release.
>>>> You are committing to a release month before you start the work.
>>>> Ron
>>>> On 06/08/2014 3:00 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>> Ron,
>>>>> In 2009 or thereabouts the PMC decided to adopt the Ubuntu way of 
>>>>> numbering OFBiz releases. Since then every year in april a release 
>>>>> was cut. But as the number of active committers is decreasing the 
>>>>> time to release a cut takes more time. Last year broke with that 
>>>>> policy, resulting in a release been cut with number 13.07.
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com <http://www.orrtiz.com/>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Ron Wheeler 
>>>>> <rwheeler@artifact-software.com 
>>>>> <mailto:rwheeler@artifact-software.com>> wrote:
>>>>>     https://ofbiz.apache.org/download.html page needs updating.
>>>>>     Is the 12.04.05 release date closer to being known?
>>>>>     The description of the Release number says that release numbers
>>>>>     consist of 2 parts
>>>>>        "The naming convention for OFBiz releases is*<Major Release
>>>>>        Number>.<Minor Release Number>"*
>>>>>     but the releases seem to have 3 digits. Patch description 
>>>>> missing.
>>>>>     The 13.x.x series part of the page puzzles me.
>>>>>     It seems to indicate that some early versions 13.0.0, 13.07.01
>>>>>     should already be able to be downloaded.
>>>>>     It also seems to indicate that the 13.x.x will be released in 
>>>>> 2014
>>>>>     which means that it should have a 14.x.x release number.
>>>>>     I am not sure why a non-standard pattern of release 
>>>>> identification
>>>>>     was adopted but it is confusing and now inconsistent.
>>>>>     It leads to the impression that the project is not active 
>>>>> since it
>>>>>     missed 2013 altogether.
>>>>>     Would it not be possible/"good thing" to adopt a standard pattern
>>>>>     of releases where the first digit indicates major change with 
>>>>> some
>>>>>     risk of serious work required to upgrade, second digit indicating
>>>>>     significant new functionality but no change to the existing data
>>>>>     structure or functions that are not changing and the last digits
>>>>>     indicating a minor bug fix?
>>>>>     Ron
>>>>>     --     Ron Wheeler
>>>>>     President
>>>>>     Artifact Software Inc
>>>>>     email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>>>>>     <mailto:rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>>>>     skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>>>>     phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 <tel:866-970-2435%2C%20ext%20102>

Ron Wheeler
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102

View raw message