David, Andy -
I agree completely on having standards for the code.
It's not a matter of putting new jpublish code into OFBIZ but just a
matter of giving people backward compatibility so they can stay with
the project and, as a result, hopefully continue to contribute to it.
As a pragmatic solution, how about we try Chris Howe's suggestion to
use bsf-2.2 instead of -2.4, so we can just either keep jpublish.jar
in the project or at least keep it compatible with OFBIZ?
On Dec 13, 2006, at 3:26 PM, A. Zeneski wrote:
I see no reason to maintain the jpublish code in OFBiz. Due to the
fact
all future components and enhancements to existing components will all
be widget based.
If the core OFBiz no longer depends on JPublish, then I see no
reason to
maintain the old code.
On the flip side, older versions of OFBiz which are not being
updated to
use the current version will continue to include the JPublish
component
and should have no effect on these projects.
All new contributions to OFBiz should follow the widget pattern, as
such
I see no point in maintaining the old JPublish handlers.
I don't like the idea of new contributions following older patterns.
IMO, the code (ajax) should be converted to use JSON request handler
pattern. I assume that since JPublish was used, this was intended to
follow the XML method for responses.
Maybe we should open up more discussion regarding new patterns. I
see a
number of AJAX being implemented in the near future and my biggest
fear
is that all of these will be following different patterns.
We need to set a standard and follow it through the code base.
Andrew
David E Jones wrote:
From a project perspective a branch seems like a lot of overhead for
this. Are you saying that you want to maintain such a branch? This
would
include regular merges, etc.
The Screen Widget has been around for over 2 years, and JPublish
hasn't
been maintained in at least that much time. Perhaps it's time to
recommend that everyone stop using it?
Part of the trouble is that there are other things that JPublish
depends
on that we'll want to update or change, and any of those (like
bsf) that
get in the way of updating other things will just branch out to a big
old problem...
-David
On Dec 13, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Si Chen wrote:
How about we make a branch called "newbsf"? We can put all the
changes
for the new bsf jars there, and if Adam ever shows up with a new
jpublish then we can merge it back in?
On Dec 13, 2006, at 2:11 PM, David E Jones wrote:
I am not opposed to this.
It would have been nice if this had come up as an approach during
earlier and ongoing discussions as quite a few changes have now
been
made to exclude JPublish (it would have to be put back into the
NOTICE/LICENSE files, the Libraries Included in OFBiz page, removed
from the OPTIONAL_LIBRARIES and change build files, code, etc.
We would also need to keep a repository or at least a patch and
how-to somewhere so the jar file could be reproduced.
-David
On Dec 13, 2006, at 2:13 PM, Si Chen wrote:
David,
We and some other people we work with all have OFBIZ-based
applications from the ofbiz 3.x days which are jpublish-based,
so to
remove jpublish from the SVN and put in something which is
incompatible with it basically breaks all of our applications and
forces us to start to diverge from the core ofbiz code base in
a way
that we don't want to.
I know what you mean about jpublish being not actively maintained,
but the flipside it seems just to work ok for us, so we don't need
to do too much for it.
I guess if we can coordinate with Adam Heath to get a new
bsf-compatible jpublish in the SVN then everything will be fine.
Until then, are you planning to do something with the new bsf
modules? Could it wait until Adam finds it in his kindness to
send
us an updated jpublish that he keeps promising?
On Dec 13, 2006, at 12:13 PM, David E Jones wrote:
Do we really want to do this? Part of the reason we wanted to
remove JPublish is that there doesn't seem to be much a community
around it and no one is maintaining it.
In other words, if we want it in OFBiz, we have to maintain it...
Unless it is really useful for something, I have a big problem
with
that...
So, I guess in order to decide it would be good to know what
you're
planning on (or have done) with JPublish that wouldn't work with
other things... and then see if that justifies maintaining
JPublish.
-David
On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:48 AM, Si Chen wrote:
When do you think you can send this in?
On Dec 13, 2006, at 9:42 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
Si Chen wrote:
David,
I see that you've removed jpublish so that the newer
versions of
bsf can
be integrated. What can we do to put jpublish back into
the main
repository? Is there a newer version of jpublish which would
work well
with the newer bsf stuff? We have a lot of things which
require
jpublish, including some ajax-related stuff we were going to
contribute
back.
I've got a fixed jpublish I need to send in. I downloaded the
version
that ofbiz is using, and did the s/com.ibm.bsf/
org.apache.bsf/ fix.
Seems to work locally.
Just been so busy.
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
