On 22 May 2011, at 03:35, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote:
> I commented on CLEREZZA-473 that the issue is far to broad and asked
> it to be split up, now clerezza 516 seems even broader.
>
> Both issue I think might be used as umbrella issues but are not
> suitable for actually doing commits against them. Many recent commits
> seems very hard to be reviewed.
>
> Just an example:
>
> I noted this code in a file called person_panel.java
>
> val typ: Resource = (agent/RDF.`type`).!
> return typ match {
> case FOAF.Person => personHtml(agent)
> case FOAF.Group => groupHtml(agent)
> case FOAF.Agent => agentHtml(agent)
> case _ => emptyText
> }
>
> To me this code clearly stinks, we should just call render(agent,
> "somemode")
That's fine with me. Why not patch that? After all the point initially
of putting this up is to get feedback, and how would I have known that you
prefer that? I am happy to do that - a priori- though perhaps not in the next
day or
two as I have to do a video of Clerezza for the presentation at the W3C
http://www.w3.org/2011/identity-ws/ Identity in the Browser Workshop
where I am presenting a paper.
http://www.w3.org/2011/identity-ws/papers/idbrowser2011_submission_22/webid.html
Then the week after I am concentrating on the Berlin workshop on
http://d-cent.org/fsw2011/
> and have different renderlets for the different type of
> agents. I wanted to see where this was introduced. I see the file has
> 4 commits, two of them are not associated to an issue and the other
> are associated with the very vague and broad and both still open
> issues 473 and 516.
Nobody had left any comments or anything on CLEREZZA-516, so I narrowed
down the name to match the patch. Of course 516 is open since what is
being built is a profile viewer.
Henry
