I'm in favor of keeping them and adding the service definitions. As Taher mentions, these are CRUD services and IMO if we have the table, we should have the set of services allowing management of the data.
These implementations are quite synonymous with the FacilityContactMech services, they're only gathering dust because we don't have very advanced work effort management screens and in cases where we do, the work effort is usually bound to a facility where the work will take place so the contact mechs from the facility are used. The moment somebody wants to start doing some event management with OFBiz, these services would become useful. What we have here is a gap in the work effort management screens, not a code bloat problem. Regards Scott On 11 September 2017 at 00:15, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com > wrote: > Here, it's not about Minilang but only service definitions > > Jacques > > > > Le 10/09/2017 à 13:23, Michael Brohl a écrit : > >> I think if we have code which is not used or planned to be used, it >> should be removed. >> >> Since we agreed on deprecating minilang, no code is allowed to be >> commited using minilang with the exception of a bug fix. We shoul be very >> restrictive in this case. >> >> I agree that we should first provide a test or convert a mini lang test >> and provide it along with the converted code. This will be an imporvement >> on the test coverage and also prove that the converted code works the same >> as the minilang version. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michael >> >> >> Am 01.09.17 um 11:34 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: >> >>> There will be years before we rewrite all the Minilang services. It's >>> just an hour to revive these services, I can do it >>> >>> It will then be easy to rewrite them with all the others. >>> >>> BTW I fear this moment of massive regressions if we don't put ALL the >>> required tests before doing the rewriting. >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> Le 01/09/2017 à 11:23, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>> >>>> Well .. according to you, the thoughts were put in these services before >>>> the apache era! I'm not sure if we want such _very_ old code revived. I >>>> also think the community is capable enough of rewriting basic CRUD >>>> services. There is no magic or incredibly sophisticated algorithms in >>>> this >>>> code. Juat another CRUD. >>>> >>>> On Sep 1, 2017 12:16 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" < >>>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I disagree, some thoughts were put in these services. They are in >>>> Minilang >>>> admittedly, but we can still keep them and transform them later and >>>> anway >>>> we have tons of Minilang services. >>>> >>>> I'm not sure if I found them all but they seem to start from >>>> updateWorkEffortContactMech and end at updateWorkEffortEmailAddress. >>>> They >>>> all use updateWorkEffortContactMech which is only used by them and has >>>> also >>>> no definition. >>>> >>>> It's 168 lines of Minilang >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 01/09/2017 à 10:47, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>>> >>>> I agree, we need to remove from the pile not add to it. Deleting is the >>>>> best course of action IMHO. Heck even some of the defined services >>>>> should >>>>> be deleted or heavily refactored for that matter. >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 1, 2017 11:33 AM, "Pierre Smits" <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> If the services are not used, we should ask ourselves whether it would >>>>> not >>>>> be best to remove these to keep the code base clean. If need be these >>>>> can >>>>> always be brought back from the repo. >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> >>>>> OFBiz based solutions & services >>>>> >>>>> OEM: the unaffiliated OFBiz Extensions Marketplace >>>>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Pawan, >>>>> >>>>>> These services implementations were created before the Apache era. >>>>>> >>>>>> I suggest we simply create the corresponding definitions and test >>>>>> they are >>>>>> OK >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 31/08/2017 à 19:38, Pawan Verma a écrit : >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello Devs, >>>>>> >>>>>>> I just walked through from *WorkEffortSimpleServices.xml* and noticed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> that >>>>>> some of the simple methods neither have any service definition nor >>>>>> used >>>>>> >>>>>>> anywhere. Some of the examples are createWorkEffortPostalAddress, >>>>>>> createWorkEffortTelecomNumber >>>>>>> etc. I was expecting that it must be there. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So I was just curious to know why it was not there, was it >>>>>>> intentional? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or >>>>>> it will be done under the Minilang deprecation task going on? Please >>>>>> let >>>>>> >>>>>>> me >>>>>>> know if anyone has any information on it else I would be more than >>>>>>> happy >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> provide a patch to get it fixed now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Thanks and Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer >>>>>>> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems >>>>>>> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> >>>>>>> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, >>>>>>> Indore, >>>>>>> M.P, India - 452010 >>>>>>> Cell phone: +91 9977705687 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >> >
