Hi Samisa,

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:53 AM, Samisa Abeysinghe <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> 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?
>
+1  and done. Will commit after code freeze is done. Now the new menu
provides a sorted list of RXTs which has options to delete/view/edit.


>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>
>
>


-- 

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

Reply via email to