It seems that Adrian has good pros deletion arguments, any cons ? Jacques
De : "Adrian Crum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The FtlTransform.java file duplicates the old code in FreeMarkerWorker.java - > therefore anyone > wanting to use it can simply use FreeMarkerWorker.java instead. > > The drawback to keeping it in the project is that someone may want to use it > - which would be a bad > thing because it duplicates the mistakes that were made in the old > FreeMarkerWorker file, PLUS it > keeps its own template cache - which introduces the possibility of having two > copies of the same > template cached. > > -Adrian > > Scott Gray wrote: > > I'm with Jacopo on this one, if it's not causing any harm we should leave it > > in until it is. > > > > Regards > > Scott > > > > On 13/08/07, Jacopo Cappellato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>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 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >> > >> > >
