Jacques,
yes, I understand your point and in some way I agree with you about
having a lighter framework could have some advantages; the issue, in my
opinion, is: if it is a working tool, even if no more used by the
official OFBiz applications, how can we be sure that no one is currently
using it?
I'm not saying that we should care about "extarnal" usage too much
(especially if keeping up-to-date an old feature would be too expensive
for the project) but, for framework features like this one, we should
not be too aggressive
My 2 cents
Jacopo
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Jacopo,
As it is not used I suggest, as proposed by Adrian, to get rid of it. If
anybody, for any reasons, needs to revive it; he/her will
be able to use Fisheye which I hope will soon be available for OFBiz
repository.
Thanks
Jacques
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Jacopo Cappellato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
À : <[email protected]>
Envoyé : lundi 13 août 2007 06:50
Objet : Re: svn commit: r564531 - in /ofbiz/branches/release4.0:
applications/content/src/org/ofbiz/content/data/
applications/content/src/org/ofbiz/content/survey/
framework/base/src/base/org/ofbiz/base/util/template/
framework/webtools/src/org/ofbiz/webtoo
I don't know... until now the common practice for things like this has
been to keep the tools in the framework even if they are old, if they
don't interfere with newer ones and if the cost to keep them updated is
not too high.
Jacopo
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Not sure this one reached the ML
Jacques
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Jacques Le Roux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
À : <[email protected]>
Envoyé : samedi 11 août 2007 13:10
Objet : Re: svn commit: r564531 - in /ofbiz/branches/release4.0:
applications/content/src/org/ofbiz/content/data/
applications/content/src/org/ofbiz/content/survey/
framework/base/src/base/org/ofbiz/base/util/template/
framework/webtools/src/org/ofbiz/webtoo
I confirm that there are no uses of this class. If nobody complain I
will remove this file soon (trunk & release)
Jacques
De : "Adrian Crum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By the way, we can remove the FtlTransform.java file - it isn't
being used and I strongly discourage
its use.
-Adrian
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Scott, Jacopo,
I understand your concerns. Anyway if I have to revert from trunk I
will revert from release too. IMHO it's surer to revert
both
than to forget to merge to release. This is why I took this
decision and also because it seems to me that these changes are
safe.
About ftl cache by default. Actually it is not disable totally,
only cleared every 10 seconds by default to facilitate
development.
And yes, I tested with cache enabled (related cache.propertieslines commented
out). Actually I continue to test...
I was sure putting the magic letters CTR, I will get some comments
;o)
Jacques
----- Message d'origine -----
De : "Jacopo Cappellato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
À : <[email protected]>
Envoyé : vendredi 10 août 2007 12:14
Objet : Re: svn commit: r564531 - in /ofbiz/branches/release4.0:
applications/content/src/org/ofbiz/content/data/
applications/content/src/org/ofbiz/content/survey/
framework/base/src/base/org/ofbiz/base/util/template/
framework/webtools/src/org/ofbiz/webtoo
Yes,
I agree with Scott here.
And about this specific commit: Jacques, did you test it with ftl
cache
enabled? I'm asking you this because, by default, if I'm not
wrong,cache
for ftl files is disabled...
Jacopo
Scott Gray wrote:
Hi Jacques
While I have no idea about this specific commit, I'm a big -1 for
a CTR
approach when it comes to the release branch. I think if your
committing a
CTR fix to the trunk then we should at least wait a week or two
before
putting it into the release.
It's great to get fixes into the branch, but we need to do our
utmost not to
introduce new bugs in the process.
Regards
Scott
On 10/08/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Author: jleroux
Date: Fri Aug 10 02:52:26 2007
New Revision: 564531
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=564531
Log:
Applied fix from trunk for revision: 564530
