James,
Inline ...
From: "james_sg" <[email protected]>
Hi Jacques,
Let me put it another way. I don't think this patch is good as it doesn't
reuse the screen definition.
Before any improvement can be made to use the screen definition, OFBiz
should understand why a layer of POJOs should exist between the screen
definition and renderers.
So why a layer of POJOs should exist? It seems we don't need them internally. You mean to be able to reuse the screen definitions
using Wicket?
Why this component?
My client handles numerous orders each day. Each order have hundreds of
items. Their existing desktop based ERP system supports the order clerks
with that requirement efficiently. Now they want to move to web-based.
Many OFBiz's forms are based on the tables instead of business objects. This
mean the user have to click here and there in order to edit the forms. More
clicking means less efficiency.
I don't get it. What is the difference between "the tables" (what are the tables?) and the "business objects" (what are the business
objects?)
This component was quickly put up so that I can rework the code to support
forms based on business object. That means having the request header,
request items etc on the same screen.
If I get it right you need to have the order/request header and items on the same screen (makes sense in your case). Why not create
your own screen(s) with OFBiz widgets? Did you need to interface with existing code+data?
Jacques
Regards,
James
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
James,
It's quite clear, and IMO you did an excellent and interesting work.
Unfortunately, I don't know if we will find enough interest in
the community to commit your patch. Mostly because it's a bit redundant
and not exactly in the spirit of OFBiz (less compilations
and reboots).
BTW why was the reason you created this component (apart that maybe you
are a huge fan of wicket ;o), did you miss something in
OFBiz?
Thanks
Jacques
From: "james_sg" <[email protected]>
Hi Jacques,
Ok, I agree one con about it, is maintenance.
The reason is because the screen renderer in OFBiz is tightly coupled
with
the screen definition.
Since this implementation is a quick hack, I go with the easier way of
coding the screen content in java instead of using the screen definition
way.
It will be good if OFbiz add a layer of POJOs between screen widgets and
the
renderer.
Hope I am clear.
Regards,
james
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Hi devs,
James yong submitted a patch (simple enough to be quickly read)
proposing
to introduce Wicket as an OFBiz framework component. I's
be interested to read your comments about pros and cons
Note the urlrewrite stuff...
One cons I see is maintenance... (We will see if James is still around,
he
created the Jira issue in August)
Thanks
Jacques
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wicket-in-OFBiz-tp3233945p3234277.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wicket-in-OFBiz-tp3233945p3234461.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
