On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:34 AM, Subash Chaturanga <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 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. > There is a usability issue with listing RXT randomy in the config tab. 1. it looks messy with 10/12 RXTs 2. I have no control as a user on the listing order The link only allow editing, thus why not have that linked form the listing page and be done with it rather than adding to the menu? > >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> 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 > > Thanks, Samisa... Samisa Abeysinghe VP Engineering WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com http://wso2.org
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
