[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Jacques Le Roux (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17045255#comment-17045255
 ] 

Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-8297:


Good news, thanks for the investigation Pierre.

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Pierre Smits
>Priority: Minor
>  Labels: configuration
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving runtime configuration variables. 
> While this flawed approach is most prevalent when working with a multi-tenant 
> setup, where  default values of runtime configuration parameters can differ 
> from tenant to tenant, it is also a wrong approach when using OFBiz in 
> controlled production setups. 
> When an adopter is required to change the value of a  runtime configuration 
> parameter, it is required to go into a code upgrade process instead of 
> changing the value through the admin component (web tools).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Pierre Smits (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17045248#comment-17045248
 ] 

Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-8297:
-

The minilang element  as used in screen definitions like 
EditAgreementItem uses the java class 'PropertyToField'. 

This java class applies the 'EntityUtilProperties' function to retrieve the 
appropriate data from the SystemProperties entity (and if not available there, 
from the appropriate .properties file. 

Will close with resolution 'Not an issue'.

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Pierre Smits
>Priority: Minor
>  Labels: configuration
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving runtime configuration variables. 
> While this flawed approach is most prevalent when working with a multi-tenant 
> setup, where  default values of runtime configuration parameters can differ 
> from tenant to tenant, it is also a wrong approach when using OFBiz in 
> controlled production setups. 
> When an adopter is required to change the value of a  runtime configuration 
> parameter, it is required to go into a code upgrade process instead of 
> changing the value through the admin component (web tools).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Michael Brohl (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17042963#comment-17042963
 ] 

Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-8297:
--

[~pierresmits], if you follow the discussion you will see that I reviewed the 
issue in a constructive way. I explained why the proposed patch is not ready to 
get committed and you simply didn't even answer or work on it further.

On the other hand you are complaining that patches grow stale and don't get 
into the codebase. That's what I call obstructive.

What do you expect? That others pick up your unfinished work and work it out 
until it's ready?

If you want this to be in the codebase, act responsible and work out an 
acceptable solution. I'll be happy to commit it as I intended in the first 
place when first reviewing the patch.

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
>  Labels: configuration
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving runtime configuration variables. 
> While this flawed approach is most prevalent when working with a multi-tenant 
> setup, where  default values of runtime configuration parameters can differ 
> from tenant to tenant, it is also a wrong approach when using OFBiz in 
> controlled production setups. 
> When an adopter is required to change the value of a  runtime configuration 
> parameter, it is required to go into a code upgrade process instead of 
> changing the value through the admin component (web tools).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Pierre Smits (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17042951#comment-17042951
 ] 

Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-8297:
-

I like this issue to get resolved, like any other issue, in an acceptable and 
amicable way that is beneficial to the project's adopters. And as is intended 
by The Apache Way.

But your comments, [~mbrohl], aren't helping.  They are rather (together with 
your actions) obstructive towards that goal. Maybe you should recuse yourself?

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
>  Labels: configuration
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving runtime configuration variables. 
> While this flawed approach is most prevalent when working with a multi-tenant 
> setup, where  default values of runtime configuration parameters can differ 
> from tenant to tenant, it is also a wrong approach when using OFBiz in 
> controlled production setups. 
> When an adopter is required to change the value of a  runtime configuration 
> parameter, it is required to go into a code upgrade process instead of 
> changing the value through the admin component (web tools).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Michael Brohl (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17042663#comment-17042663
 ] 

Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-8297:
--

[~jleroux] you have reopened the issue, I tend to close again (see comments 
before).

How should we solve this?

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
>  Labels: configuration
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving runtime configuration variables. 
> While this flawed approach is most prevalent when working with a multi-tenant 
> setup, where  default values of runtime configuration parameters can differ 
> from tenant to tenant, it is also a wrong approach when using OFBiz in 
> controlled production setups. 
> When an adopter is required to change the value of a  runtime configuration 
> parameter, it is required to go into a code upgrade process instead of 
> changing the value through the admin component (web tools).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Jacques Le Roux (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17028364#comment-17028364
 ] 

Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-8297:


BTW, I wonder if Moqui has a Tenant feature. I ask because I know a bit about 
the history of the creation of the feature in OFBiz. I was participating to a 
project with David and Andrew in 2010 when, out of blue, the client wanted a 
tenant feature. David created in a week or 2 and it has not much evolved since, 
apart the system properties in DB. We continuously have issues (more conflict 
of interests between people POVs) with it and I now wonder if it's a good thing 
to continue to maintain it. Hence the question about Moqui :)

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Michael Brohl (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17028363#comment-17028363
 ] 

Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-8297:
--

{quote}Michael, 

First you claimed that the provided patch would break functionality.

However if you would have looked a little further you would have found that the 
key-value pair exists in CommonSystemPropertyData since 2012-02-01 see 
[https://fisheye.apache.org/browse/ofbiz-framework/framework/common/data/CommonSystemPropertyData.xml?r2=13ff4e3f4c6f41864d62c6cdb6931a02f4b85e73=c690a5aba578f0df25df572cec734f4eb3c57038]

The CommonSystemPropertyData is loaded as seed data (see the 
ofbiz-component.xml.
{quote}
I am aware of this. With the patch you changed the retrieval of the property 
from file properties to just database driven SystemProperty.

This assumes that users always use the SystemProperty mechanism to retrieve 
properties which is not valid. There are good reasons to not use SystemProperty 
at all as a default and just use it to override file properties at runtime, 
especially when you have a multi stage server setup with different property 
sets.

So if you want to enhance the mechanism to cover both worlds correctly, you 
should use the EntityUtilProperties mechanism.

 
{quote}In 2019 you claimed the patch was incomplete, without providing 
additional information.
{quote}
Correct, see above. The patch is breaking existing mechanisms and therefore can 
be viewed as incomplete.

 
{quote}It seems to me you were 'managing' the ticket and expecting others (me) 
to resolve your concerns, instead of working it yourself.
{quote}
 

If a contributor provides a patch, it is the committers responsibility to check 
if the solution is valid, does not break functionality and has an overall 
quality to be introduced to the codebase. This does IMO not imply that he is 
responsible to rework a patch until it fits. It's a strange viewpoint to expect 
the committer to do the corrections himself instead of the original contributor 
feeling responsible for his solution.

As you can see from the history, I gave my opinions and asked you to rework it 
with a hint what is wrong with the first solution.

*No answer for a year.*

I then asked you if your are going to provide a corrected patch (note that I 
picked it up again, not you). You then criticized that the patch is getting old 
and asked me to rework your patch and immediately got an answer from me.

*No answer for another year.* I closed the issue as announced a year ago.

That's where we are now and you are going to criticize how I deal with this 
ticket instead of working on the solution you want to be in the codebase?

This pattern repeats on several of your issues and might be one of the reasons 
why they are picked up by the community less frequently than others.

 

 

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Pierre Smits (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17028186#comment-17028186
 ] 

Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-8297:
-

Michael, 

First you claimed that the provided patch would break functionality. 

However if you would have looked a little further you would have found that the 
key-value pair exists in CommonSystemPropertyData since 2012-02-01 see 
[https://fisheye.apache.org/browse/ofbiz-framework/framework/common/data/CommonSystemPropertyData.xml?r2=13ff4e3f4c6f41864d62c6cdb6931a02f4b85e73=c690a5aba578f0df25df572cec734f4eb3c57038]
 

The CommonSystemPropertyData is loaded as seed data (see the 
ofbiz-component.xml.

In 2019 you claimed the patch was incomplete, without providing additional 
information.

It seems to me you were 'managing' the ticket and expecting others (me) to 
resolve your concerns, instead of working it yourself.

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Michael Brohl (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16741222#comment-16741222
 ] 

Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-8297:
--

I'm the assignee because I was willing to review and possibly commit your patch.

The patch is icomplete and I have described what's wrong with it. I did not get 
an answer for a year so it seems legitimate to ask if this is an issue you want 
to work on.

If this is not the case (which is  ok) and noone else is interested in doing 
so, I'll close this issue in due time.

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Pierre Smits (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16741218#comment-16741218
 ] 

Pierre Smits commented on OFBIZ-8297:
-

[~mbrohl],

The ticket, and the patch, are more than 2 years old. So it is logical to say 
that with the rate of changes applied to the code base patches provided will 
get outdated rather fast. This can be avoided very easily.

But, Michael, you're the assignee of the ticket. Why don't you redo the work I 
contributed on this ticket?

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Michael Brohl (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16741215#comment-16741215
 ] 

Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-8297:
--

[~pfm.smits], do you want to provide a corrected patch?

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
>Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

[jira] [Commented] (OFBIZ-8297) Convert

[Michael Brohl (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16314991#comment-16314991
 ] 

Michael Brohl commented on OFBIZ-8297:
--

I think the patch breaks existing functionality.

It changes the property retrieval from file properties to database bases system 
properties but provides no fallback to properties if the system properties are 
not filled.

Please provide a patch where the original mechanism is used when system 
properties are not filled.

> Convert  --
>
> Key: OFBIZ-8297
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8297
> Project: OFBiz
>  Issue Type: Sub-task
>  Components: ALL COMPONENTS
>Affects Versions: Trunk
>Reporter: Pierre Smits
>Assignee: Michael Brohl
> Attachments: OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch, 
> OFBIZ-8297-AgreementScreens.xml.patch
>
>
> * files when it comes to retrieving configuration variables. This doesn't work 
> in a multi-tenant setup. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)