Contributors mailing list archives
Re: OCA Dev & Deploy Tooling PSCby
Camptocamp SA, Joël Grand Guillaume
So I suggest the second one for all those kind of toole because community maintainers is more about tools to ease the review and community process..
The second one says "is responsible for all projects that bring various tools, such as : deploying tools, report system, data files, server environments, ..."
The first one says " is responsible for all the tools that ease the review and pull request management."
* Tools Maintainers (https://odoo-community.org/project/tools-maintainers-30)
To clarify, we have :* Community Maintainers (https://odoo-community.org/project/community-maintainers-46)
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Nhomar Hernandez <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:23 AM, David Arnold <email@example.com> wrote:Hi,
I want to suggest and solicit the creation of OCA Dev & Deploy Tooling PSC.
I want to take responsibility in the PSC and ensure thereby a technical and well-informed discussion.
I further want promote convergence and best practices in the OCA on this topic, keeping an eye on the needs of newcomers.
If this finds approval, I would like to convocate an open design process on the creation / convergence of a comprehensive set of base docker images, that are suitable for production and Dev and compatible with existing (anybox) as well as embrace new tooling.
In a next step, I would like to focus on the Dev sugar, because this is where there is a real perceived lack of coolness ;) in the existent tooling.
In some future I would like to open up discussion about possible deployment techniques. However, I feel this is many steps ahead still & with anybox, we have a "running horse". ("Never change a running horse")
I would like to have anyone especially interested in this topic and with sufficient technical knowledge in the field to express his interest in taking responsibility in the PSC.
I'm furthermore committed to aport to a better OCA culture. (I admit, I'm not happy with the current state.)
David.Again, I do not know how explain this.If you are not commited to make the first design/development, I really do not understand which is the process you want to propose.You want bring to some place a set of expert to solve the issues you see, then put the free in some other place just after you give a bless? (that's what I understand here with your proposals).You have the tools available (and some of them unfinished yet) but if you do not give spefic feedback or specific code to them it is difficult to grow up, the code is not done by itself just with good willing....In other hand, Can you try to give/test existing projects? because all what I read is complex to understand and is show a lot o leak of knowledge, which probably are solved already.Did you "at least" give some 1 or 2 +1 in any project related to OCA already?Dd you try the runbot with OCA PR?
Did you solved at least 1 issue?I mean: I'm furthermore committed to accept that we maybe we need a better OCA culture. (BUT I admit, I'm not happy with your current way of work.)But I think mantainer-quality-tools is the place already, maintainer tools is other one.... Why push in other direction/project than the one that help us all and impact directly the benefit of 100% of repositories availables?:-1: for me.--