On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Samisa Abeysinghe <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Subash Chaturanga <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Samisa Abeysinghe <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Looking at these use cases, I would imagine that we have to have an LC >>> like listing of RXT types under config tab, rather than having them listed >>> individually in there - in other words, one-stop-shop view to help with >>> these actions. >>> >> >> If I am not mistaken you mean a LC like listing under Home > Extensions > >> Configure > Lifecycles ? If so that is the intended implementation >> (i.e Home > Extensions > Configure > Artifact Types). >> > > +1 > > > >> Anyway we will have the RXT configurations individually listed under >> Home > Configure. >> > > If we have the above, would we still need this? > In the current implementation what we have is the RXTs gets list under Home > Configure. And what I am implementing is a LC creation like UI as above which also has the list of artifacts. And there I thought a delete option is enough in that list. > > > >> >> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Senaka Fernando <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Subash, >>>> >>>> Hold on, there are multiple angles to this. You've just pointed out >>>> one, but there are several other things one might try to do. For example, >>>> >>>> 1. someone might want to create a copy from an existing RXT and create >>>> a new one. Some people actually do this even today. For them, edit is not >>>> required, but being able to view the existing RXT is. (note: in the LC UI, >>>> view and edit are both a single interface). >>>> >>>> 2. another user might try to make changes to the columns in a list UI, >>>> but not actually change the layout of the add/edit view. Asking someone to >>>> delete and add again is not the best answer. >>>> >>>> So, for #1, view is required and for #2 a partial edit is required. We >>>> also have a #3, which Eranda pointed out (i.e. being able to reconfigure >>>> the layout of the add/edit view). #3 can actually be done through the >>>> configure UI, but one could ask, why don't we have a complete edit instead >>>> of a partial edit, and get rid of the separate configure UI. This would >>>> make services and RXTs inconsistent, but then again, we can convert service >>>> to be represented using an RXT too. >>>> >>>> So, I'd like to suggest that we reconsider this decision and understand >>>> the problem end-to-end and find a proper lasting solution, without >>>> attempting a quick fix. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Senaka. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Eranda Sooriyabandara <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Subash, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Subash Chaturanga <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> This is regarding when GReg provides a UI to upload RXTs and also >>>>>> list them. Shall we have $subject ? Because if we provide edit options >>>>>> for >>>>>> an already installed RXT, once the RXT config is updated, already created >>>>>> RXT instances out of the old one becomes staled. And you cannot expect >>>>>> the >>>>>> new behavior from the old instances (users might not able to identify the >>>>>> old ones explicitly) . In that context I feel it is an invalid use case. >>>>>> >>>>>> This can be considered when we support development time governance. >>>>>> So shall we do $subject ? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> +1. Since we use have the validations for RXTs when uploading, we >>>>> should have the feeling that there are no error in the configuration. So I >>>>> guess there is no point in updating a RXT other than to do a content >>>>> (artifact content) change which can be done by changing the configuration >>>>> (Configure tab). So there are less or no usecase in changing the RXT. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> Eranda >>>>> >>>>> * >>>>> * >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Senaka Fernando* >>>> Member - Integration Technologies Management Committee; >>>> Technical Lead; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com* >>>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org >>>> >>>> E-mail: senaka AT wso2.com >>>> **P: +1 408 754 7388; ext: 51736*; *M: +94 77 322 1818 >>>> Linked-In: http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando >>>> >>>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>> Samisa... >>> >>> Samisa Abeysinghe >>> VP Engineering >>> WSO2 Inc. >>> http://wso2.com >>> http://wso2.org >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Subash Chaturanga >> Software Engineer >> WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com >> >> email - [email protected] >> phone - 077 2225922 >> >> Thanks, > Samisa... > > Samisa Abeysinghe > VP Engineering > WSO2 Inc. > http://wso2.com > http://wso2.org > > > -- Subash Chaturanga Software Engineer WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com email - [email protected] phone - 077 2225922
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
