p.s maybe we should contribute the Clerezza LDpath integration to Clerezza instead of managing those modules in Stanbol. This would affect the modules
* commons.ldpath.clerezza * commons.ldpathtemplate WDYT Rupert On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Rupert Westenthaler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I did some re-refactoring yesterday to me there's one open point with >> STANBOL-910 which I described in the latest comment. If I don't get any >> feedback I'll go for the suggested approach of merging the two >> viewable-writer modules but I can live perfectly well we the other >> described approach (separate rdfviewable-writer module). >> > > I am -1 for making the Stanbol UI depending on LDpath. Simple because > I do not see a good reason why one would need such an dependency. > > I also think that commons.ldpathtemplate should be removed as soon as > we switch to a newer LDpath version for that the ldpathtemplate code > is available as bundle in maven central. I plan to work on the upgrade > to the newest LDpath version as soon as the first version with the > org.apache.marmotta.ldpath packages is released. This was also the > reason why I tried to remove all other functionality out of this > bundle. Now with the new LdRenderer this will be no longer possible - > but maybe thats ok as I do not see an other module where the > LdRenderer fits well. > > Having an own commons/freemaker module is IMO a good ides, as it > solves the issue that commons.web.core embeds and exports freemaker. > It can also be handy if we want to seperate the WebUI from the RESTful > services at a later point in time. > > best > Rupert > >> Cheers, >> Reto >> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Fabian Christ <[email protected] >>> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I agree that we should avoid to work on many things in parallel. Try >>> to implement and commit things step by step. Otherwise things are hard >>> to follow and not easy to revert if discussion come up. >>> >>> To the situation at hand: I can not say anything on the technical >>> level to the concrete problem. Are you now in the position Reto to >>> work around the refactoring and make the usermanager work again for >>> you? Once it runs again - we should find a consensus how things should >>> be changed. >>> >>> Best, >>> - Fabian >>> >>> 2013/2/13 Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]>: >>> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Rupert Westenthaler >>> > <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Please just restore the original LdRenderer service an the >>> >>> corresponding version of the UserManager. We can add an >>> >>> RdfViewablRenderer service later, I think its overarchitecture to >>> >>> separate out the LDVieable implementation. But first things first: >>> >>> restore the better status quo ante with the Ldrenderer. >>> >> >>> >> LDRenderer was in ldpathtemplate; I created a new module, added those >>> >> to bundlelists (both in trunk and a branch); changed exports and >>> >> import statements that are now conflicting with an lot of additional >>> >> changes I made while working on STANBOL-924 and STANBOL-927. Sorry I >>> >> think reverting is no longer an option as it would take longer as >>> >> implementing the service as suggested above. >>> > >>> > I think we should avoid working on an issue while dependent issues >>> > aren't resolved. >>> > >>> > Also removing the LDRenderer service was not something which was clear >>> > that this would happen neither from the description of the issue nor >>> > from the discussion on the list. >>> > >>> > As you refuse to do it, I'll read the LdRenderer service (using your >>> > new TemplateLoader service) so that UserManager can be reverted to >>> > where the code was both more elegant and working. >>> > >>> > Reto >>> >> >>> >> best >>> >> Rupert >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> | Rupert Westenthaler [email protected] >>> >> | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 >>> >> | A-5500 Bischofshofen >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Fabian >>> http://twitter.com/fctwitt >>> > > > > -- > | Rupert Westenthaler [email protected] > | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 > | A-5500 Bischofshofen -- | Rupert Westenthaler [email protected] | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 | A-5500 Bischofshofen
