Contributors mailing list archives
Re: Proposal for new workflow, incorporating "Optimistic Merging"by
NUMIGI Solutions Inc., Bruno Joliveau.
Hi Community, This thread remembers me the publisher who, for a while, did the marketing race to as many modules. I thought one of the objectives of OCA's users and founders is to trust in a stable code. How can we help to keep this way ? Have a nice day, Thanks, Bruno JOLIVEAU ERP Project Director @ Savoir Faire Linux More links : bruno.joliveau.com Le 07.06.2016 09:09, Maxime Chambreuil a écrit : > I agree quality is important, but you won't lose it by deploying from > packages. Packages will still have good quality. > > Keeping quality for packages will allow us to have collaboration and > innovation (which comes with unstability) in Github repos. > > The gateway between unstable repository and stable packages is a manual > release process. > > Le mar. 7 juin 2016 à 06:23, Rafael Blasco > <email@example.com> a écrit : > >> Hi @ll, >> >> I'm not agree in an optimistic merging approach. This opinion depends >> of what do you think OCA is and OCA can be. >> >> OCA must ensure the quality of modules. This modules must be robust >> and never fail. OCA is a community that Customers take as reference of >> things well done, something that they can trust. >> >> Odoo is an ERP which fight with the big ones and implement Business >> processes worldwide. This is not CMS. Two examples: (1) You cannot >> trust in 99% of wordpress modules (2) In Odoo Apps store there are >> many many modules that are more a problem for the customer than a >> benefic (even-though you pay for it). >> >> When a customer trust in Odoo don't want to be optimistic, wants no >> risk for the investment. Customer must trust in OCA, >> >> Furthermore, in my experience, I quoted projects based in "what is >> done thanks of OCA" so Customer can afford project. This was >> absolutely a big mistake and I must said "we must develop everything". >> Because you don't expect to find such a bugs that you must refactor >> everything. This means that optimistic merging will create a feeling >> of "uncertainty OCA". >> Do we want more contributors? What is a contributor, someone who make >> PRs or someone who review PRs? Both. We need more reviewers too. >> Code Contributors in OCA must thanks what they will learn thanks to >> OCA and the experimented reviewers. They will significantly improve >> their professional skills. With optimistic merging which is the >> challenge? >> >> What will happens with the difference between contributors? The ones >> who make big efforts to make stable software, then ones who make quick >> software. >> >> Maybe it should be an "OCA Quality" and "OCA optimistic", meaning of >> their stamps will be very different and the we will ask customer: do >> you want to be optimistic and take a risk? or do you want to be sure >> about what your business software will do? >> >> Let's make last question. Why someone wants to put their modules to >> OCA? >> >> - Because they will have visibility --> Why OCA have more visibility? >> Because you will find a well done work. >> - Because modules will be reviewed without cost >> >> OCA deserves an effort because many people have worked hard to get >> this reputation worldwide. >> >> Regards, >> >> Rafael >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15 >> Post to: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org >> Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe > > -- > > Maxime Chambreuil > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15 > Post to: mailto:email@example.com > Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe
Open Source Integrators, Daniel Reis