Create Release from 10.04 release branch

[Anil Patel-3]

Hi,
Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is there enough interest in community for creating a official release?


Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new release branch, may be 10.07?

Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
HotWax Media Inc
Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"

[Scott Gray-2]

I'm in favor of releasing it, 3 months have passed since we created the branch and it is relatively stable (!= bug free) now with no known deal breaking bugs as far as I am aware.

Regards
Scott

On 27/07/2010, at 3:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:

> Hi,
> Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is there enough interest in community for creating a official release?
>
>
> Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new release branch, may be 10.07?
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Anil Patel
> HotWax Media Inc
> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>

[Adrian Crum-2]

I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.

I would like to remove the conversion framework from the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.

Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug fix, but it could help users of the release find compatibility problems with various databases.

-Adrian

--- On Mon, 7/26/10, Scott Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Scott Gray <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc: "Anil Patel" <[hidden email]>
> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 8:46 PM
> I'm in favor of releasing it, 3
> months have passed since we created the branch and it is
> relatively stable (!= bug free) now with no known deal
> breaking bugs as far as I am aware.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 27/07/2010, at 3:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite
> sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is there enough
> interest in community for creating a official release?
> >
> >
> > Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new
> release branch, may be 10.07?
> >
> > Thanks and Regards
> > Anil Patel
> > HotWax Media Inc
> > Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google
> Keyword "ofbiz"
> >
>
>

     

[Scott Gray-2]

On 27/07/2010, at 4:17 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.

I don't think it would happen instantly, we'd still need to vote, prepare press releases etc.  but it would be good to get the formal release up on everyones radar.

> I would like to remove the conversion framework from the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.

So you'd restore the conditionals that were there previously right?

> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug fix, but it could help users of the release find compatibility problems with various databases.

I think back porting tests has come up before in discussions, personally I'm hugely in favor of it.

>
> -Adrian
>
> --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Scott Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> From: Scott Gray <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Cc: "Anil Patel" <[hidden email]>
>> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 8:46 PM
>> I'm in favor of releasing it, 3
>> months have passed since we created the branch and it is
>> relatively stable (!= bug free) now with no known deal
>> breaking bugs as far as I am aware.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> On 27/07/2010, at 3:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite
>> sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is there enough
>> interest in community for creating a official release?
>>>
>>>
>>> Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new
>> release branch, may be 10.07?
>>>
>>> Thanks and Regards
>>> Anil Patel
>>> HotWax Media Inc
>>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google
>> Keyword "ofbiz"
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Adrian Crum-2]

--- On Mon, 7/26/10, Scott Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 27/07/2010, at 4:17 PM, Adrian
> Crum wrote:
>
> > I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>
> I don't think it would happen instantly, we'd still need to
> vote, prepare press releases etc.  but it would be good
> to get the formal release up on everyones radar.
>
> > I would like to remove the conversion framework from
> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>
> So you'd restore the conditionals that were there
> previously right?

Right. I will just remove the code that was inserted in SqlJdbcUtil.java.

> > Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
> fix, but it could help users of the release find
> compatibility problems with various databases.
>
> I think back porting tests has come up before in
> discussions, personally I'm hugely in favor of it.
>
> >
> > -Adrian
> >
> > --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Scott Gray <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Scott Gray <[hidden email]>
> >> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release
> branch
> >> To: [hidden email]
> >> Cc: "Anil Patel" <[hidden email]>
> >> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 8:46 PM
> >> I'm in favor of releasing it, 3
> >> months have passed since we created the branch and
> it is
> >> relatively stable (!= bug free) now with no known
> deal
> >> breaking bugs as far as I am aware.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Scott
> >>
> >> On 27/07/2010, at 3:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>> Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for
> quite
> >> sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is
> there enough
> >> interest in community for creating a official
> release?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and
> create new
> >> release branch, may be 10.07?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks and Regards
> >>> Anil Patel
> >>> HotWax Media Inc
> >>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or
> Google
> >> Keyword "ofbiz"
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Adam Heath-2]

Adrian Crum wrote:
> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>
> I would like to remove the conversion framework from the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>
> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug fix, but it could help users of the release find compatibility problems with various databases.

Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new code would
be perfectly fine.

[Adrian Crum-2]

Cool. Thanks Scott and Adam! All of the backports I had in mind have been committed.

-Adrian

--- On Mon, 7/26/10, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 9:46 PM
> Adrian Crum wrote:
> > I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
> >
> > I would like to remove the conversion framework from
> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
> >
> > Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
> fix, but it could help users of the release find
> compatibility problems with various databases.
>
> Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new
> code would
> be perfectly fine.
>

     

[Tim Ruppert]

Thanks Adrian.

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

> Cool. Thanks Scott and Adam! All of the backports I had in mind have been committed.
>
> -Adrian
>
> --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 9:46 PM
>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>>>
>>> I would like to remove the conversion framework from
>> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
>> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
>> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>>>
>>> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
>> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
>> fix, but it could help users of the release find
>> compatibility problems with various databases.
>>
>> Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new
>> code would
>> be perfectly fine.
>>
>
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Let me know when you want me to start the process and I will initiate it (by creating a tag, preparing the signed package in my home folder, initiating a vote for the release).

Kind regards,

Jacopo

On Jul 27, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:

> Thanks Adrian.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>
>> Cool. Thanks Scott and Adam! All of the backports I had in mind have been committed.
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>> --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
>>> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 9:46 PM
>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to remove the conversion framework from
>>> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
>>> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
>>> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>>>>
>>>> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
>>> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
>>> fix, but it could help users of the release find
>>> compatibility problems with various databases.
>>>
>>> Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new
>>> code would
>>> be perfectly fine.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

[Ean Schuessler]

I guess the basic questions might be: Did we have an official "freeze"
process where we only accepted bug fixes against that branch? Do we have
any open bugs that are considered "release critical"?

On 07/26/2010 10:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:

> Hi,
> Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is there enough interest in community for creating a official release?
>
>
> Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new release branch, may be 10.07?
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Anil Patel
> HotWax Media Inc
> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

On Jul 29, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Ean Schuessler wrote:

> I guess the basic questions might be: Did we have an official "freeze" process where we only accepted bug fixes against that branch?

Yes.

> Do we have any open bugs that are considered "release critical"?

No.

Kind regards,

Jacopo

>
> On 07/26/2010 10:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite sometime now. It seems to be quite stable. Is there enough interest in community for creating a official release?
>>
>>
>> Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new release branch, may be 10.07?
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> HotWax Media Inc
>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>
>>
>

[Adam Heath-2]

On 07/29/2010 01:53 AM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> I guess the basic questions might be: Did we have an official "freeze"
> process where we only accepted bug fixes against that branch? Do we have
> any open bugs that are considered "release critical"?

I agree.  At least *all* bugs should be looked at, and given a target
release tag, etc.  Time for some bug triage.  I don't think there has
been a concerted effort like that in like, forever.

>
> On 07/26/2010 10:16 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Ofbiz release branch 10.04 has been around for quite sometime now. It
>> seems to be quite stable. Is there enough interest in community for
>> creating a official release?
>>
>>
>> Other option might be, we discard 10.04 and create new release branch,
>> may be 10.07?
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> HotWax Media Inc
>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>
>>
>

[Scott Gray-2]

I wonder if before we do a formal release we shouldn't perhaps take another look at our release naming convention of {year}.{month}?

Do people find it useful?  Does it cause any confusion?

To be honest I don't really like it and would prefer to just have OFBiz 10, OFBiz 11, etc.  I don't feel strongly about it but thought it might be worth raising before we continue.

Regards
Scott

On 27/07/2010, at 6:55 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> Let me know when you want me to start the process and I will initiate it (by creating a tag, preparing the signed package in my home folder, initiating a vote for the release).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Jul 27, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> Thanks Adrian.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>>
>> On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>
>>> Cool. Thanks Scott and Adam! All of the backports I had in mind have been committed.
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>> --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
>>>> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 9:46 PM
>>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to remove the conversion framework from
>>>> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
>>>> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
>>>> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
>>>> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
>>>> fix, but it could help users of the release find
>>>> compatibility problems with various databases.
>>>>
>>>> Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new
>>>> code would
>>>> be perfectly fine.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

On Aug 1, 2010, at 1:56 AM, Scott Gray wrote:

> I wonder if before we do a formal release we shouldn't perhaps take another look at our release naming convention of {year}.{month}?
>
> Do people find it useful?  Does it cause any confusion?

I don't like it too, even if I too don't feel strongly about it. If there is a general consensus we could return to a more traditional naming convention... but at this point what I really would like to avoid is a huge brainstorming thread that will delay forever our releases. If the consensus will be difficult to reach, I would suggest to keep the conversation going and in the meantime continue with our current (and new) release strategy.

Kind regards,

Jacopo

>
> To be honest I don't really like it and would prefer to just have OFBiz 10, OFBiz 11, etc.  I don't feel strongly about it but thought it might be worth raising before we continue.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 27/07/2010, at 6:55 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>
>> Let me know when you want me to start the process and I will initiate it (by creating a tag, preparing the signed package in my home folder, initiating a vote for the release).
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> On Jul 27, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Adrian.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>>
>>> On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cool. Thanks Scott and Adam! All of the backports I had in mind have been committed.
>>>>
>>>> -Adrian
>>>>
>>>> --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
>>>>> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 9:46 PM
>>>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>>> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to remove the conversion framework from
>>>>> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
>>>>> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
>>>>> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
>>>>> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
>>>>> fix, but it could help users of the release find
>>>>> compatibility problems with various databases.
>>>>>
>>>>> Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new
>>>>> code would
>>>>> be perfectly fine.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[David E. Jones-2]

IMO the current convention is fine. The thing to keep in mind is that the year.month is for the release branch, ie when it branched from the trunk and IMO it should always stay that way. Having sub-versions over time for bug-fix binary releases should work just fine with another dot and a number representing the sequence index.

Still, I'm also of the opinion that we should not have more than one release branch per year, and that the month could be eliminated. I know there are many who would like to see more frequent release branches, so just in case that happens it might as well stay as is for now.

-David


On Aug 1, 2010, at 2:17 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> On Aug 1, 2010, at 1:56 AM, Scott Gray wrote:
>
>> I wonder if before we do a formal release we shouldn't perhaps take another look at our release naming convention of {year}.{month}?
>>
>> Do people find it useful?  Does it cause any confusion?
>
> I don't like it too, even if I too don't feel strongly about it. If there is a general consensus we could return to a more traditional naming convention... but at this point what I really would like to avoid is a huge brainstorming thread that will delay forever our releases. If the consensus will be difficult to reach, I would suggest to keep the conversation going and in the meantime continue with our current (and new) release strategy.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jacopo
>
>>
>> To be honest I don't really like it and would prefer to just have OFBiz 10, OFBiz 11, etc.  I don't feel strongly about it but thought it might be worth raising before we continue.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> On 27/07/2010, at 6:55 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>
>>> Let me know when you want me to start the process and I will initiate it (by creating a tag, preparing the signed package in my home folder, initiating a vote for the release).
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>> On Jul 27, 2010, at 7:55 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Adrian.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:27 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cool. Thanks Scott and Adam! All of the backports I had in mind have been committed.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>
>>>>> --- On Mon, 7/26/10, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Create Release from 10.04 release branch
>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>> Date: Monday, July 26, 2010, 9:46 PM
>>>>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>>>> I still need to backport some fixes to the branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to remove the conversion framework from
>>>>>> the entity engine - for the same reason I did it in the
>>>>>> trunk. I would just remove the conversion code in the branch
>>>>>> and I would not include the new JdbcValueHandler code.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Plus, I would like to add the expanded entity engine
>>>>>> tests - if there are no objections. I know that isn't a bug
>>>>>> fix, but it could help users of the release find
>>>>>> compatibility problems with various databases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adding any new test cases that themselves don't add any new
>>>>>> code would
>>>>>> be perfectly fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>