Contributors mailing list archives
Re: Request for new project oca/queueby
Camptocamp SA, Yannick Vaucher
+1 to separate them completelyI think that for the fear expressed by Pedro, 2 repositories are completely ok without the need to name queue with connector in it as the point of separating them is to say clearly "you can use the queue without the connector".
However, what could be done is that OCA connector team should still be in charge of both repository as for now I don't think there would be enough people for 2 teams, maybe I'm wrong.
Business Solutions Software Developer
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
Office: +41 21 619 10 10
On 10 October 2016 at 15:08, Simone Orsi <email@example.com> wrote:
+1On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Stéphane Bidoul <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:+1On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 2:38 PM Guewen Baconnier <email@example.com
om> wrote:Hi, This is an important step in the evolution of the connector framework. The job queue has proved to be versatile and has been used in many more uses that mere connectors. Therefore, I took a step forward and during the code sprint last week, I started to split the connector addon in two: * queue_job: extraction of the job queue (with a great rework BTW) * connector: the remaining stuff for developing connectors (backends, ConnectorUnit classes, ...) This is targeted for Odoo 10. To gain broader interest, I want to "unbrand" the job queue from the "connector" naming. I propose a new OCA project which would be "oca/queue". The PSC would be, at least at the beginning, the same than the OCA/connector one for simplicity. Does it sound good to you? -- Guewen Baconnier Business Solutions Software Developer Camptocamp SA PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne Phone: +41 21 619 10 39 Office: +41 21 619 10 10 http://www.camptocamp.com/