Hi all,

Quoting Jacques Le Roux (2019-12-18 12:39:56)
> OK, I sent this message before seeing Mathieu's last one. I guess the revert 
> Mathieu should close this discussion. I suggest to create a new one about 
> feature forking (please stop this one).

feature forking is another discussion => agree with this! But I'd like
to finish this discussion about component-load.xml because I still want
to remove this file (I mean in framework, in plugins you can do whatever
you want)

> 
> I must say I'm strongly against feature forking. I have already explained 
> myself why several times. I can reiterate if needed. Mostly for the same 
> reason Mathieu already exposed in his last message actually.
> 
> For the new feature itself, it seems wise to me to have it working with 
> component-load.xml files before starting it on the trunk...

It is working with component-load.xml from the start! but not with
framework, applications components directories which is (from my point
of view) an implementation detail: you should not rely on which order
framework is loading its components!

It seems to me that you should write your code in plugins and actually
in plugins you can expect every components in framework to be loaded,
but maybe I'm wrong about how users use obfiz framework...

> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jacques
> 
> Le 18/12/2019 à 12:09, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > In this thread I superficially see a conversation where no one listens to 
> > anyone else's point of view.
> >
> > If I dig a bit more I see Mathieu's perspective who wants to achieve 
> > something new which depends on the discussed subject (his [1] below).
> >
> > And Michael's perspective who worries about custom projects in production.
> >
> > Those are facts, now let's analyse each last main arguments.
> >
> > Mathieu asks Michael to provide  an "explanation regarding why it matters 
> > in production environments to be able to patch" component-load.xml files

yes we are still waiting for your answer Michael ;) In my opinion we
cannot go ahead in this discussion without your answer, without your
need about component-load.xml: are you trying to avoid loading a
particular framework component? do you patch a framework component and
need another one to be loaded first to make your patch works? ...

> >
> > Michael does not answer this question but reiterate a question Mathieu did 
> > not answer yet: "is [this] tested working [together] with component-load.xm"

Condidering poor test coverage of obfiz this question seems to me
irrelevant! I will really appreciate to reject any patch proposal which
does not come with a test, but, if I'm correct, this not a practise in
ofbiz community.

As I've done the requested test manually and Mathieu has reverted the
commit I think we can left behind this question.

Samuel

> >
> > I believe these points must be answered before we get further in this 
> > discussion
> >
> > Jacques
> >

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply via email to