Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-11296:

[~mthl], please consider that people have limited time and that they have to 
put priorities on how they spent it. Putting pressure on (non bugfixing) issues 
does not help good collaborations.

Please also refrain to put judgements in your statements like "why they 
consider to mess with..." or else. Simply trust people who are around for a 
long time and have deep, real life project experience with OFBiz for a long 
time (for me it's coming to about 18 years now).

This project is not only about tech, it has a user base with serious business 
running on base of OFBiz. This has always to be considered as serious as good 
technical solutions should be considered. So we cannot simply change things 
because single contributors like other technical solutions better. We have to 
remain downwards compatible and manage deprecation of features carefully.

Until now, there was not a single thumbs up from experienced contributors for 
this change, but objections from others. This alone should make you think about 
your approach.

Me fighting for the right approach also does not necessarily mean that I have 
(current) personal or customer interests in mind. The user base is much bigger 
than "my" user base.

If you read carefully what I previously wrote, there are several uses for the 
applications component-load.xml:
 * deactivation of unused component(s) by commenting out the load-component 
entry (why load marketing resources if you don't use the component at the 
 * addition of components (yes, I've seen projects where this was not done 
through the hot-deploy mechanism)
 * ordering these components in the right load order

While you can argument that these might be "wrong" approaches, they are 
technically valid and used in customer projects. Therefore we cannot simply 
switch the mechanisms without a proper deprecation period.

For the plugins, all the above use cases are common in our projects. We also 
use a multi-level configuration mechanism (standard default - custom standard 
default - project default and targeted systems) where we are able to do 
fine-grained configurations and generate the resulting component-load.xml at 
build time.

My proposal would be to actively ask other contributors with significant 
project experience for their input before re-commiting anything.

If there is a demand for yur solution, I would also propose to make the 
solution compatible with the component-load mechanism and leave the old 
component-load.xml in place, together with a deprecation announcement and 
proper documentation on how to migrate. This would introduce the new depends-on 
in the next release but does not change anything for existing users if they 
want to stick with the component-load mechanism.

For the plugins, I object to introduce the mechanism at all for the above 
stated reasons.

I hope this explains my point of view clear enough, please ask if it does not.




> Use 'depends-on' everywhere
> ---------------------------
>                 Key: OFBIZ-11296
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-11296
>             Project: OFBiz
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: framework
>    Affects Versions: Trunk
>            Reporter: Mathieu Lirzin
>            Assignee: Mathieu Lirzin
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: Upcoming Branch
>         Attachments: 
> OFBIZ-11296_0001-Improved-Use-depends-on-attribute-instead-of-compone.patch, 
> OFBIZ-11296_ignore-depends-on-when-a-component-load.xml-is-prese.patch
> We currently have two ways to define component loading order. Either
> by using ‘depends-on’ attribute in “component-config.xml” or by adding
> a “component-load.xml” file at the root of a component directory.
> “depends-on” is more flexible because it handles partial ordering when
> “component-load.xml” defines a total order which is not necessarily
> meaningful, so it is better to rely only “depends-on”.

This message was sent by Atlassian Jira

Reply via email to