Users of the release4.0 branch?

[David E Jones]

It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it. So...

1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in production or moving in that direction?

2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the current state of the branch?

At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...

Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that may help attract end-users to the branch.

Thanks,
-David

[jonwimp]

I've done about 3-4 projects using release4.0 by now. Seems ok. Many features are incomplete, but
one could label those as "to be customized". Bugs are still around, some even show-stopping ones.
I'm still trying to gift-wrap OFBiz, so that I can finish up some docs I had been writing, and to
publish them somehow.

But... I think you should roll out a binary release soon, given how bugfixes have been applied to
the branch over past months, and how no new features/bugs have been added to it.

Not everyone likes to download via SVN. A binary release may attract even more testers. You can
always roll out updated binary releases over the next few months, which may suggest progress and
attract even more interest.

Jonathon

David E Jones wrote:

>
> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
> order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
> sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
> So...
>
> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> production or moving in that direction?
>
> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> current state of the branch?
>
> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>
> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
> may help attract end-users to the branch.
>
> Thanks,
> -David
>
>

[Ray Barlow]

I was just composing a similar message!

The suggestion I was going to make is that we consider doing a release
candidate, making sure it is packaged for easy download and deployment
and importantly announced that it's around. SVN is not always the most
attractive for people looking to evaluate what the project is all about,
as I see Jonathon has just responded with the same thoughts.

It might help to raise the interest and testing required to fix any
final issues, as there is a lot of good work going into patching bug
fixes in the release branch.

Ray


David E Jones wrote:

>
> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch
> (late April). The hope for these release branches is that they will
> stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary
> release. In order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a
> reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work
> based on it. So...
>
> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> production or moving in that direction?
>
> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> current state of the branch?
>
> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>
> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else
> that may help attract end-users to the branch.
>
> Thanks,
> -David
>

[Jacopo Cappellato]

I agree,

and I really think we should also provide official weekly snapshots from
trunk.

Jacopo

Ray Barlow wrote:

> I was just composing a similar message!
>
> The suggestion I was going to make is that we consider doing a release
> candidate, making sure it is packaged for easy download and deployment
> and importantly announced that it's around. SVN is not always the most
> attractive for people looking to evaluate what the project is all about,
> as I see Jonathon has just responded with the same thoughts.
>
> It might help to raise the interest and testing required to fix any
> final issues, as there is a lot of good work going into patching bug
> fixes in the release branch.
>
> Ray
>
>
> David E Jones wrote:
>> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch
>> (late April). The hope for these release branches is that they will
>> stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary
>> release. In order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a
>> reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work
>> based on it. So...
>>
>> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
>> production or moving in that direction?
>>
>> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
>> current state of the branch?
>>
>> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
>> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
>> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
>> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
>> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>>
>> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
>> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
>> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else
>> that may help attract end-users to the branch.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -David
>>

[BJ Freeman]

one in production as we speak but won't have much use till Oct.
another about to go into production (installing today) with tier
communications and POS


David E Jones sent the following on 9/14/2007 12:50 AM:

>
> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
> order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
> sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
> So...
>
> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> production or moving in that direction?
>
> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> current state of the branch?
>
> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>
> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
> may help attract end-users to the branch.
>
> Thanks,
> -David
>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1 for all below

Montly would not be enough ?

Jacques

----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>
À : <[hidden email]>
Envoyé : vendredi 14 septembre 2007 11:38
Objet : Re: Users of the release4.0 branch?

> I agree,
>
> and I really think we should also provide official weekly snapshots from
> trunk.
>
> Jacopo
>
> Ray Barlow wrote:
> > I was just composing a similar message!
> >
> > The suggestion I was going to make is that we consider doing a release
> > candidate, making sure it is packaged for easy download and deployment
> > and importantly announced that it's around. SVN is not always the most
> > attractive for people looking to evaluate what the project is all about,
> > as I see Jonathon has just responded with the same thoughts.
> >
> > It might help to raise the interest and testing required to fix any
> > final issues, as there is a lot of good work going into patching bug
> > fixes in the release branch.
> >
> > Ray
> >
> >
> > David E Jones wrote:
> >> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch
> >> (late April). The hope for these release branches is that they will
> >> stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary
> >> release. In order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a
> >> reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work
> >> based on it. So...
> >>
> >> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> >> production or moving in that direction?
> >>
> >> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> >> current state of the branch?
> >>
> >> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> >> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> >> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
> >> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
> >> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
> >>
> >> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> >> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> >> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else
> >> that may help attract end-users to the branch.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -David
> >>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

BJ,

Do you use the POS OOTB ?

Thanks

Jacques

De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>

> one in production as we speak but won't have much use till Oct.
> another about to go into production (installing today) with tier
> communications and POS
>
>
> David E Jones sent the following on 9/14/2007 12:50 AM:
> >
> > It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
> > April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
> > within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
> > order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
> > sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
> > So...
> >
> > 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> > production or moving in that direction?
> >
> > 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> > current state of the branch?
> >
> > At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> > committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> > summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
> > files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
> > feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
> >
> > Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> > near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> > responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
> > may help attract end-users to the branch.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -David
> >
> >
> >
>

[Adrian Crum]

David E Jones wrote:
> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
> may help attract end-users to the branch.

I agree. It's probably a good time to put the R4 binary out there to help encourage people to use it.

[BJ Freeman]

I am not sure what OOTB means. (blushing)
I have decided to use the pos in ofbiz so will be providing code on the
additions I will be implementing.


Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 9/14/2007 5:18 AM:

> BJ,
>
> Do you use the POS OOTB ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
> De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
>> one in production as we speak but won't have much use till Oct.
>> another about to go into production (installing today) with tier
>> communications and POS
>>
>>
>> David E Jones sent the following on 9/14/2007 12:50 AM:
>>> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
>>> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
>>> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
>>> order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
>>> sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
>>> So...
>>>
>>> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
>>> production or moving in that direction?
>>>
>>> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
>>> current state of the branch?
>>>
>>> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
>>> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
>>> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
>>> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
>>> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>>>
>>> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
>>> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
>>> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
>>> may help attract end-users to the branch.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

[SkipDever]

OOTB = Out of the Box, e.g. unchanged.

-----Original Message-----
From: BJ Freeman [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 9:04 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Users of the release4.0 branch?


I am not sure what OOTB means. (blushing)
I have decided to use the pos in ofbiz so will be providing code on the
additions I will be implementing.


Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 9/14/2007 5:18 AM:

> BJ,
>
> Do you use the POS OOTB ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
> De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
>> one in production as we speak but won't have much use till Oct.
>> another about to go into production (installing today) with tier
>> communications and POS
>>
>>
>> David E Jones sent the following on 9/14/2007 12:50 AM:
>>> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
>>> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
>>> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
>>> order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
>>> sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
>>> So...
>>>
>>> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
>>> production or moving in that direction?
>>>
>>> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
>>> current state of the branch?
>>>
>>> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
>>> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
>>> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
>>> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
>>> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>>>
>>> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
>>> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
>>> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
>>> may help attract end-users to the branch.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Out Of The Box,

Great anyway !

Jacques

De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>

> I am not sure what OOTB means. (blushing)
> I have decided to use the pos in ofbiz so will be providing code on the
> additions I will be implementing.
>
>
> Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 9/14/2007 5:18 AM:
> > BJ,
> >
> > Do you use the POS OOTB ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> > De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
> >> one in production as we speak but won't have much use till Oct.
> >> another about to go into production (installing today) with tier
> >> communications and POS
> >>
> >>
> >> David E Jones sent the following on 9/14/2007 12:50 AM:
> >>> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
> >>> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
> >>> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
> >>> order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
> >>> sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
> >>> So...
> >>>
> >>> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> >>> production or moving in that direction?
> >>>
> >>> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> >>> current state of the branch?
> >>>
> >>> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> >>> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> >>> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
> >>> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
> >>> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
> >>>
> >>> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> >>> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
> >>> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
> >>> may help attract end-users to the branch.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> -David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
>

[BJ Freeman]

normally I get a client up and running with OOTB, like today.
then i add in the modules as they are needed.
in this case I will be adding in the Yahoo store interface later this month.

This lets the client start to get some familiarity and use, instead of
waiting till the project is complete.

I have found it also generated more customization as they see what they
want.


Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 9/14/2007 10:17 AM:

> Out Of The Box,
>
> Great anyway !
>
> Jacques
>
> De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
>> I am not sure what OOTB means. (blushing)
>> I have decided to use the pos in ofbiz so will be providing code on the
>> additions I will be implementing.
>>
>>
>> Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 9/14/2007 5:18 AM:
>>> BJ,
>>>
>>> Do you use the POS OOTB ?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> De : "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
>>>> one in production as we speak but won't have much use till Oct.
>>>> another about to go into production (installing today) with tier
>>>> communications and POS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David E Jones sent the following on 9/14/2007 12:50 AM:
>>>>> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
>>>>> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
>>>>> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In
>>>>> order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably
>>>>> sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it.
>>>>> So...
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
>>>>> production or moving in that direction?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
>>>>> current state of the branch?
>>>>>
>>>>> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
>>>>> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
>>>>> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues
>>>>> files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much
>>>>> feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>>>>>
>>>>> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
>>>>> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the
>>>>> responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that
>>>>> may help attract end-users to the branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

[Mark Erbaugh]

On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 01:50 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it. So...
>
> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in production or moving in that direction?
>
> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the current state of the branch?
>
> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>
> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that may help attract end-users to the branch.

What is the procedure for working with a release branch?  I used
Subclipse (in Eclipse) to checkout the release 4 branch and I have been
working with a local copy thinking that the branch was frozen. The
comments above sound like it is not.

At this point, I'm trying to learn OfBiz and wanted to get a (more)
solid footing before the code started changing underneath me.

This question also goes to my lack of familiarity with Subversion.  So
far, I've only used it to track my own projects.  Right now, what I did
was checkout the release 4 branch. I then disconnected the project from
the repository and re-created a project in my local repository.  That
way, as I'm learning, I can try code changes to see what happens, and
still revert pieces.

I have to add that I am using a satellite based ISP that while higher
speed than dialup, limits the amount of data I can download (to 200 MB
per day) except between 3am and 6am. I know this is not ideal, but
traditional high speed choices aren't available to me.

So I checked out the project early one morning and have been working
with the local copy. Is there a way with Subclipse (or Subversion) to
tell how much data needs to be transferred to sync up?

Mark

[Scott Gray]

Hi Mark

While I don't have any figures, the update should be pretty light especially
for the release branch which only sees bug fixing commits.  It would depend
on how old your snapshot is but even if it were over a month old I wouldn't
expect the update to consume more a couple of MB.

Regards
Scott

On 15/09/2007, Mark Erbaugh <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 01:50 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
> > It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late
> April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize
> within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In order
> for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably sized subset
> of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it. So...
> >
> > 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in
> production or moving in that direction?
> >
> > 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the
> current state of the branch?
> >
> > At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because
> committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a
> summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues files
> specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much feedback
> from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
> >
> > Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the
> near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the responses in
> this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that may help attract
> end-users to the branch.
>
> What is the procedure for working with a release branch?  I used
> Subclipse (in Eclipse) to checkout the release 4 branch and I have been
> working with a local copy thinking that the branch was frozen. The
> comments above sound like it is not.
>
> At this point, I'm trying to learn OfBiz and wanted to get a (more)
> solid footing before the code started changing underneath me.
>
> This question also goes to my lack of familiarity with Subversion.  So
> far, I've only used it to track my own projects.  Right now, what I did
> was checkout the release 4 branch. I then disconnected the project from
> the repository and re-created a project in my local repository.  That
> way, as I'm learning, I can try code changes to see what happens, and
> still revert pieces.
>
> I have to add that I am using a satellite based ISP that while higher
> speed than dialup, limits the amount of data I can download (to 200 MB
> per day) except between 3am and 6am. I know this is not ideal, but
> traditional high speed choices aren't available to me.
>
> So I checked out the project early one morning and have been working
> with the local copy. Is there a way with Subclipse (or Subversion) to
> tell how much data needs to be transferred to sync up?
>
> Mark
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

De : "Mark Erbaugh" <[hidden email]>
> On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 01:50 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
> > It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late April). The hope for these release branches is that
they will stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In order for this to happen effectively each
branch needs a reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it. So...
> >
> > 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in production or moving in that direction?
> >
> > 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the current state of the branch?
> >
> > At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects
(quite a summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues files specifically for release4.0 and because there
hasn't been much feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
> >
> > Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless
of the responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that may help attract end-users to the branch.
>
> What is the procedure for working with a release branch?  I used
> Subclipse (in Eclipse) to checkout the release 4 branch and I have been
> working with a local copy thinking that the branch was frozen. The
> comments above sound like it is not.

Don't know if it's of any use to you : http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Release+Plan

Jacques

[jonwimp]

Hi Mark,

 > I have to add that I am using a satellite based ISP that while
 > higher speed than dialup, limits the amount of data I can download
 > (to 200 MB per day) except between 3am and 6am. I know this is not
 > ideal, but traditional high speed choices aren't available to me.

200MB isn't too little, unless you also have to download other stuff too. A usual update size is
about a few MB at most. HOWEVER, when there are changes to 3rd-party binaries, the update size can
go up quite a bit. Updating is usually not problematic (unless it gets disrupted, and the update
size is huge). It's the initial checking out that can kill you.

Even with high internet speeds, the http protocol for downloading via SVN can sometimes be
disrupted (and you have to start all over again). We have OFBiz students here in Singapore who
complain that they simply can't complete a checkout of OFBiz (we have high speed broadband). So,
we actually had to send them a tarball of a pre- checked out OFBiz (including .svn files). As I
said, updating (not checking out fresh) usually is fine.

For some time now, I had been suggesting that we DO NOT include the 35+MB binaries in the SVN. SVN
is used to track CHANGES to files. Since we cannot change binaries (only source codes), binaries
have no business residing in SVN. In fact, a guy who claimed he knows SVN, but who later proceeded
to check in version after version of his project binaries, got fired. Yeah, it's that scary to see
someone use version control app to maintain software binaries (pic binaries are fine).

There's this argument put forth that "it's more convenient if we bundle the binaries in, so that
new users can get up to speed quickly". However, new users who bother to use SVN should already be
quite technically inclined, and will be able to run a script to "install" 3rd-party binaries into
a deployment.

As it is now, with the 35+MB (or more?) binaries in SVN, it simply makes it somewhat harder even
for experienced SVN or OFBiz users to download OFBiz.

Maybe this wasn't taken up because I didn't completely describe my recommended solution. So, here
goes!

1. Check out the latest OFBiz

2. Create an MD5 signature of all 3rd-party binaries.

3. Take out all those binaries.

4. Commit the MD5 signature.

5. Bundle those binaries into a tarball to be downloaded separately,
    outside of SVN.

6. Create script to deploy those binaries back into OFBiz file
    structure.

7. Commit that script.

Something like that.

Even the 4+MB Dojo can be packaged separately, rather than stuffed into the SVN! That'll be about
40+MB less to download from SVN (http protocol)!

I've done that umpteen times already, so if the OFBiz team wants me to actually do it for them,
I'd be glad to help.

David Jones recently mentioned "drop-in or add-in components". That is a sweet ideal. Shouldn't we
attempt to component-ize OFBiz then? That way, we can drop in Dojo or Prototype, Log4J version x
or Log4J version y, etc.

If anyone wants to know how MD5 signatures can help in both decentralized software development
teams and in legal documents, maybe read up on MD5 in wikipedia or something.

Jonathon

Mark Erbaugh wrote:

> On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 01:50 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
>> It has been nearly 5 months since we created the release4.0 branch (late April). The hope for these release branches is that they will stabilize within about 3 months and be ready for an initial binary release. In order for this to happen effectively each branch needs a reasonably sized subset of the OFBiz community doing real-world work based on it. So...
>>
>> 1. Are there any users of the release4.0 branch with projects in production or moving in that direction?
>>
>> 2. For anyone in that group, could you share your thoughts on the current state of the branch?
>>
>> At the minute the initial binary release has been delayed because committers and the PMC have been very busy on other projects (quite a summer!), but mostly because there just don't seem to be many issues files specifically for release4.0 and because there hasn't been much feedback from users grouping around that branch. Hence this email...
>>
>> Because of the passing of time we will release a binary version in the near future (perhaps a couple of weeks or so) regardless of the responses in this thread or other relevant threads. If nothing else that may help attract end-users to the branch.
>
> What is the procedure for working with a release branch?  I used
> Subclipse (in Eclipse) to checkout the release 4 branch and I have been
> working with a local copy thinking that the branch was frozen. The
> comments above sound like it is not.
>
> At this point, I'm trying to learn OfBiz and wanted to get a (more)
> solid footing before the code started changing underneath me.
>
> This question also goes to my lack of familiarity with Subversion.  So
> far, I've only used it to track my own projects.  Right now, what I did
> was checkout the release 4 branch. I then disconnected the project from
> the repository and re-created a project in my local repository.  That
> way, as I'm learning, I can try code changes to see what happens, and
> still revert pieces.
>
> I have to add that I am using a satellite based ISP that while higher
> speed than dialup, limits the amount of data I can download (to 200 MB
> per day) except between 3am and 6am. I know this is not ideal, but
> traditional high speed choices aren't available to me.
>
> So I checked out the project early one morning and have been working
> with the local copy. Is there a way with Subclipse (or Subversion) to
> tell how much data needs to be transferred to sync up?
>
> Mark
>
>

[David E Jones]

Jonathon -- Improov wrote:

> For some time now, I had been suggesting that we DO NOT include the
> 35+MB binaries in the SVN. SVN is used to track CHANGES to files. Since
> we cannot change binaries (only source codes), binaries have no business
> residing in SVN. In fact, a guy who claimed he knows SVN, but who later
> proceeded to check in version after version of his project binaries, got
> fired. Yeah, it's that scary to see someone use version control app to
> maintain software binaries (pic binaries are fine).
>
> There's this argument put forth that "it's more convenient if we bundle
> the binaries in, so that new users can get up to speed quickly".
> However, new users who bother to use SVN should already be quite
> technically inclined, and will be able to run a script to "install"
> 3rd-party binaries into a deployment.
>
> As it is now, with the 35+MB (or more?) binaries in SVN, it simply makes
> it somewhat harder even for experienced SVN or OFBiz users to download
> OFBiz.

This really isn't so much for new users, it's for all users of OFBiz, and IMO mostly for the regular and highly involved users. You either manually manage it or let a system do it. There is no way, period, I'd personally go for this because it would cause significant problems without any real upside for 99% of OFBiz users and developers, most importantly the contributing developers that SVN is meant for.

Manual things cause huge problems for complex systems. The extra effort require to normally do it is a small issue, the huge time wasting caused by small errors in these manual processes makes them worth all the effort and downside necessary to avoid them.

-David

[rajsaini]

David,

Maven 2 is the right solution to the problem. I know Maven has its own
problem but as long as separating the jars  from source is concerned
Maven is a good choice. Almost all of the ASF projects use it.

Thanks,

Raj
David E Jones wrote:

>
>
> Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
>> For some time now, I had been suggesting that we DO NOT include the
>> 35+MB binaries in the SVN. SVN is used to track CHANGES to files.
>> Since we cannot change binaries (only source codes), binaries have no
>> business residing in SVN. In fact, a guy who claimed he knows SVN,
>> but who later proceeded to check in version after version of his
>> project binaries, got fired. Yeah, it's that scary to see someone use
>> version control app to maintain software binaries (pic binaries are
>> fine).
>>
>> There's this argument put forth that "it's more convenient if we
>> bundle the binaries in, so that new users can get up to speed
>> quickly". However, new users who bother to use SVN should already be
>> quite technically inclined, and will be able to run a script to
>> "install" 3rd-party binaries into a deployment.
>>
>> As it is now, with the 35+MB (or more?) binaries in SVN, it simply
>> makes it somewhat harder even for experienced SVN or OFBiz users to
>> download OFBiz.
>
> This really isn't so much for new users, it's for all users of OFBiz,
> and IMO mostly for the regular and highly involved users. You either
> manually manage it or let a system do it. There is no way, period, I'd
> personally go for this because it would cause significant problems
> without any real upside for 99% of OFBiz users and developers, most
> importantly the contributing developers that SVN is meant for.
>
> Manual things cause huge problems for complex systems. The extra
> effort require to normally do it is a small issue, the huge time
> wasting caused by small errors in these manual processes makes them
> worth all the effort and downside necessary to avoid them.
>
> -David
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

I totally agree with David, really easier for us.

Jacques

De : "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>

>
>
> Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
> > For some time now, I had been suggesting that we DO NOT include the
> > 35+MB binaries in the SVN. SVN is used to track CHANGES to files. Since
> > we cannot change binaries (only source codes), binaries have no business
> > residing in SVN. In fact, a guy who claimed he knows SVN, but who later
> > proceeded to check in version after version of his project binaries, got
> > fired. Yeah, it's that scary to see someone use version control app to
> > maintain software binaries (pic binaries are fine).
> >
> > There's this argument put forth that "it's more convenient if we bundle
> > the binaries in, so that new users can get up to speed quickly".
> > However, new users who bother to use SVN should already be quite
> > technically inclined, and will be able to run a script to "install"
> > 3rd-party binaries into a deployment.
> >
> > As it is now, with the 35+MB (or more?) binaries in SVN, it simply makes
> > it somewhat harder even for experienced SVN or OFBiz users to download
> > OFBiz.
>
> This really isn't so much for new users, it's for all users of OFBiz, and IMO mostly for the regular and highly involved users.

You either manually manage it or let a system do it. There is no way, period, I'd personally go for this because it would cause
significant problems without any real upside for 99% of OFBiz users and developers, most importantly the contributing developers
that SVN is meant for.
>
> Manual things cause huge problems for complex systems. The extra effort require to normally do it is a small issue, the huge time
wasting caused by small errors in these manual processes makes them worth all the effort and downside necessary to avoid them.
>
> -David
>

[jonwimp]

 > You either manually manage it

There's nothing for users or downloaders to manage. If there's a problem with doing a complete SVN
checkout, there's nothing to manage in the first place! No OFBiz SVN workspace to begin with!

It's also tough for someone who has somehow lost his OFBiz SVN workspace, and has to SVN co the
whole thing again.

 > or let a system do it.

What kind of system will:

1. Speed up SVN over http (before it times out), OR

2. Prevent a SVN co from being disrupted, OR

3. Resume a disrupted SVN co?

I'd like to know. That kind of system will really help a lot!

 > Manual things cause huge problems for complex systems.

The deployment script (that deploys binaries into OFBiz file structure) isn't complex at all. It's
nowhere near Redhat's RPM, Debian's apt-get, etc!

As for verifying that OFBiz workspace has all necessary binaries, the single MD5 manifest can
easily be processed with a single click (or even as part of the deployment script). And that will
tell the developer exactly which binaries are missing or different from expected.

So, the process for a new user is:

1. Download SVN.

2. SVN checkout OFBiz.

3. Download libraries (binaries).

4. Click to install libraries (and to verify).

5. Configure OFBiz.

6. Install OFBiz (run-install)

7. Start OFBiz.

Note how only 2 of the 7 steps are extra.

Currently, many users (including some of my clients) can't even get past step 2! Many won't even
consider step 1, to begin with.

 > The extra effort require to normally do it is a small issue, the huge time
 > wasting caused by small errors in these manual processes makes them worth all
 > the effort and downside necessary to avoid them.

Well, apt-get isn't so difficult to use, right? And the deploy/clean scripts I am talking about is
nowhere near as difficult to develop as apt-get!

 > I totally agree with David, really easier for us.

But have you tried doing things in another way, so you know for sure that other way doesn't work
for you?

Anyway, if you're happy with the current setup, I rest my case.

Jonathon

Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> I totally agree with David, really easier for us.
>
> Jacques
>
> De : "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>>
>> Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
>>> For some time now, I had been suggesting that we DO NOT include the
>>> 35+MB binaries in the SVN. SVN is used to track CHANGES to files. Since
>>> we cannot change binaries (only source codes), binaries have no business
>>> residing in SVN. In fact, a guy who claimed he knows SVN, but who later
>>> proceeded to check in version after version of his project binaries, got
>>> fired. Yeah, it's that scary to see someone use version control app to
>>> maintain software binaries (pic binaries are fine).
>>>
>>> There's this argument put forth that "it's more convenient if we bundle
>>> the binaries in, so that new users can get up to speed quickly".
>>> However, new users who bother to use SVN should already be quite
>>> technically inclined, and will be able to run a script to "install"
>>> 3rd-party binaries into a deployment.
>>>
>>> As it is now, with the 35+MB (or more?) binaries in SVN, it simply makes
>>> it somewhat harder even for experienced SVN or OFBiz users to download
>>> OFBiz.
>> This really isn't so much for new users, it's for all users of OFBiz, and IMO mostly for the regular and highly involved users.
> You either manually manage it or let a system do it. There is no way, period, I'd personally go for this because it would cause
> significant problems without any real upside for 99% of OFBiz users and developers, most importantly the contributing developers
> that SVN is meant for.
>> Manual things cause huge problems for complex systems. The extra effort require to normally do it is a small issue, the huge time
> wasting caused by small errors in these manual processes makes them worth all the effort and downside necessary to avoid them.
>> -David
>>
>
>