Board Report Draft - Please Review ASAP

[David E Jones]

Hey all,

I need to get this sent of right away (this evening preferably) in  
order to give board members plenty of time to review it before the  
board meeting next Wednesday.

This is our first report to the board, so there is a lot in it, and  
to make things more interesting I'm not totally sure about how it's  
all supposed to work!

Anyway, an initial draft is on docs.ofbiz.org here:

http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/-wM

I would appreciate any comments or feedback anyone might have.

For those following OFBiz, this is also an interesting resource to  
keep up with what is happening (or has happened) in the project.

-David

[Jacopo Cappellato]

+1

David E. Jones wrote:

>
> Hey all,
>
> I need to get this sent of right away (this evening preferably) in order
> to give board members plenty of time to review it before the board
> meeting next Wednesday.
>
> This is our first report to the board, so there is a lot in it, and to
> make things more interesting I'm not totally sure about how it's all
> supposed to work!
>
> Anyway, an initial draft is on docs.ofbiz.org here:
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/-wM
>
> I would appreciate any comments or feedback anyone might have.
>
> For those following OFBiz, this is also an interesting resource to keep
> up with what is happening (or has happened) in the project.
>
> -David
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1 and congratulations to Scott !

BTW David, I put a comment as answer to your question about release in
http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Release+Plan?focusedCommentId=1027#comment-1027

Jacques

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: Board Report Draft - Please Review ASAP

> +1
>
> David E. Jones wrote:
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I need to get this sent of right away (this evening preferably) in order
> > to give board members plenty of time to review it before the board
> > meeting next Wednesday.
> >
> > This is our first report to the board, so there is a lot in it, and to
> > make things more interesting I'm not totally sure about how it's all
> > supposed to work!
> >
> > Anyway, an initial draft is on docs.ofbiz.org here:
> >
> > http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/-wM
> >
> > I would appreciate any comments or feedback anyone might have.
> >
> > For those following OFBiz, this is also an interesting resource to keep
> > up with what is happening (or has happened) in the project.
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
>

[David E Jones]

On Jan 13, 2007, at 4:15 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> BTW David, I put a comment as answer to your question about release in
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Release+Plan?
> focusedCommentId=1027#comment-1027

Yeah, this sort of thing should probably be discussed on the mailing  
list and then once discussed we can decide if any change to the  
document needs to be done.

I'm not so sure about the Ubuntu versioning mechanism... I think it  
is much more clear if each branch we do is represented by a major/
minor version number change, and then follow on releases within that  
branch would be represented by the sub-minor version number change.

Anyway, this is described in the General Release Policies.

Are you saying that you propose to do this differently?

-David

[Jacques Le Roux]

This was only a suggestion, I like it because with this you have more information than just a number. But I will not push more for
this...

Jacques

----- Original Message -----
From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: Board Report Draft - Please Review ASAP

>
> On Jan 13, 2007, at 4:15 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> > BTW David, I put a comment as answer to your question about release in
> > http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Release+Plan?
> > focusedCommentId=1027#comment-1027
>
> Yeah, this sort of thing should probably be discussed on the mailing
> list and then once discussed we can decide if any change to the
> document needs to be done.
>
> I'm not so sure about the Ubuntu versioning mechanism... I think it
> is much more clear if each branch we do is represented by a major/
> minor version number change, and then follow on releases within that
> branch would be represented by the sub-minor version number change.
>
> Anyway, this is described in the General Release Policies.
>
> Are you saying that you propose to do this differently?
>
> -David
>
>
>

[David E Jones]

If there is enough interest in it then we should certainly go for it,  
or at least consider it.

The main reason I don't like it is because it doesn't represent the  
proposed branching process very well.

-David


On Jan 13, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> This was only a suggestion, I like it because with this you have  
> more information than just a number. But I will not push more for
> this...
>
> Jacques
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]>
> To: <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 5:13 PM
> Subject: Re: Board Report Draft - Please Review ASAP
>
>
>>
>> On Jan 13, 2007, at 4:15 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>> BTW David, I put a comment as answer to your question about  
>>> release in
>>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Release+Plan?
>>> focusedCommentId=1027#comment-1027
>>
>> Yeah, this sort of thing should probably be discussed on the mailing
>> list and then once discussed we can decide if any change to the
>> document needs to be done.
>>
>> I'm not so sure about the Ubuntu versioning mechanism... I think it
>> is much more clear if each branch we do is represented by a major/
>> minor version number change, and then follow on releases within that
>> branch would be represented by the sub-minor version number change.
>>
>> Anyway, this is described in the General Release Policies.
>>
>> Are you saying that you propose to do this differently?
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Mmm... I did not thought about that...

To ease reflexion/discussion a quote :

"Release branches will be created approximately once per year; these will represent a new minor version number, and in cases of
major and/or non-backward compatible changes a major version number"

We may use the same acronym than Ubuntu (LTS or our own brand ;o) to characterize major and/or non-backward compatible changes in
branches names ?

Jacques

----- Original Message -----
From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: Board Report Draft - Please Review ASAP

>
> If there is enough interest in it then we should certainly go for it,
> or at least consider it.
>
> The main reason I don't like it is because it doesn't represent the
> proposed branching process very well.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> > This was only a suggestion, I like it because with this you have
> > more information than just a number. But I will not push more for
> > this...
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David E. Jones" <[hidden email]>
> > To: <[hidden email]>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 5:13 PM
> > Subject: Re: Board Report Draft - Please Review ASAP
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On Jan 13, 2007, at 4:15 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>
> >>> BTW David, I put a comment as answer to your question about
> >>> release in
> >>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Release+Plan?
> >>> focusedCommentId=1027#comment-1027
> >>
> >> Yeah, this sort of thing should probably be discussed on the mailing
> >> list and then once discussed we can decide if any change to the
> >> document needs to be done.
> >>
> >> I'm not so sure about the Ubuntu versioning mechanism... I think it
> >> is much more clear if each branch we do is represented by a major/
> >> minor version number change, and then follow on releases within that
> >> branch would be represented by the sub-minor version number change.
> >>
> >> Anyway, this is described in the General Release Policies.
> >>
> >> Are you saying that you propose to do this differently?
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

[David E Jones]

On Jan 13, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Mmm... I did not thought about that...
>
> To ease reflexion/discussion a quote :
>
> "Release branches will be created approximately once per year;  
> these will represent a new minor version number, and in cases of
> major and/or non-backward compatible changes a major version number"
>
> We may use the same acronym than Ubuntu (LTS or our own brand ;o)  
> to characterize major and/or non-backward compatible changes in
> branches names ?

Isn't that a bit backwards? The point of "LTS" is a promise for the  
future. A major revision number representing major and/or non-
backward compatible changes refers to something that has happened in  
the past, since the last release branch.

-David

[David E Jones]

On Jan 13, 2007, at 5:45 PM, David E. Jones wrote:

> On Jan 13, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> Mmm... I did not thought about that...
>>
>> To ease reflexion/discussion a quote :
>>
>> "Release branches will be created approximately once per year;  
>> these will represent a new minor version number, and in cases of
>> major and/or non-backward compatible changes a major version number"
>>
>> We may use the same acronym than Ubuntu (LTS or our own brand ;o)  
>> to characterize major and/or non-backward compatible changes in
>> branches names ?
>
> Isn't that a bit backwards? The point of "LTS" is a promise for the  
> future. A major revision number representing major and/or non-
> backward compatible changes refers to something that has happened  
> in the past, since the last release branch.

Finishing my thought... we could use some sort of acronym or tag line  
for major new releases, even if LTS doesn't make as much sense. Of  
course, if we get to a point where we really like how OFBiz behaves  
out of the box, then we might want to do a LTS-style release.

-David