Haan, I'm sorry to hear that, I guess if no one else feels strongly about this then I'll bow out and allow you to continue with your duplication of existing code.
Regards Scott HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com On 3/02/2010, at 11:52 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > Scoot, > > i am sorry. As I mentioned in another email jacopo already saw that we > are too far down the road. I cannot change. Anybody with Ebay knowledge > would appreciate this contribution and replace the old ebay component > directly with the new one. > > I am sorry i am very busy here and cannot spend more time on this. > > Hans. > > p.s. my reaction was on my proposal to have a "work in progress list > added" irrelevant anyway. > > > On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 23:35 -0800, Scott Gray wrote: >> On 3/02/2010, at 11:04 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: >> >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> I only wondering why you send this email, can you explain that to me? >> >> As I mentioned below, your commits indicated that you are continuing in your >> current direction which is something I disagree with, I was hoping some >> agreement could be reached through discussion. Was it in some way >> unreasonable to send the email? >> >>> Anyway, thanks for asking, i still think it is required. It showed with >>> the ebay component: >>> >>> 1. creators of the original component would have liked to discuss it. >> >> Maybe I missed them but what questions have you asked regarding the current >> implementation that someone could respond to? >> Regardless, once the code becomes part of the project there is no longer any >> requirement for the original developers to provide you with code support, >> and that lack of support doesn't necessarily give you a green light to >> create a duplicate component which will ultimately cause harm to the >> community. >> >>> 2. a non committer had already developed a component as we just did. >> >> Huh? How is that relevant? >> >>> so a lot of effort could have been saved here..... >>> >>> However if nobody wants it, sure i will give up. >>> >>> don't worry about that. >> >> It's not about not wanting your eBay contributions, it's about avoiding >> duplication in the project which will leave users confused and with >> additional analysis to do and I'm yet to see a good reason for this other >> than that it is easier for you. >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Hans >>> >>> On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 22:40 -0800, Scott Gray wrote: >>>> Hi Hans, >>>> >>>> Based on your recent commits I guess your considering this discussion over? >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> On 3/02/2010, at 1:01 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 3, 2010, at 8:43 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jacopo, >>>>>> >>>>>> what we need is a wiki page where people can announce activities and >>>>>> plans. Not only from committers but also from contributors and perhaps >>>>>> even users. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have proposed this before. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think we already have something similar: >>>>> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/New+Features+Roadmap+-+Living+Document >>>>> >>>>>> In this case we tried to extend the existing ebay component but found >>>>>> out that the xml interface could never support the required functions as >>>>>> we needed them. >>>>> >>>>> This is not a good reason for stopping your research about supported >>>>> features and building a new component. >>>>> The valid options I see are: >>>>> 1) adding *new* features to the original component using the different >>>>> technology >>>>> 2) and enhancing the existing features, where needed, using the XML >>>>> approach or >>>>> 3) reimplement the existing features in the original component with the >>>>> new technology before enhancing them >>>>> >>>>> Jacopo >>>>> >>>>>> Please also remember that not all required functions >>>>>> were known from the start. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Hans >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 08:30 +0100, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Hans, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> first of all, thank you for contributing this big amount of code. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2010, at 5:05 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Scott, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am also not sure if we need 2 components. That can only be decided by >>>>>>>> the users of the original Ebay component isn't it? I do not know the >>>>>>>> user requirements of the original ebay component. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Having two components with potentially overlapping features for the >>>>>>> same integration in the official trunk will cause maintenance problems >>>>>>> and confusion; I guess we will all agree on this. >>>>>>> I am not asking you to redo your job, it is too late, but... can we >>>>>>> agree that from now on, before implementing a new feature in the trunk >>>>>>> (or, even worst, before adding a new component) we have to study and >>>>>>> understand what already exists and do our best to enhance the existing >>>>>>> stuff? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now we moved the new functionality to a separate component it is >>>>>>>> getting >>>>>>>> more clear if the old component is still required or not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a pain, but we will do this, I can't see another solution now, >>>>>>> as soon as you have completed your work: instead of you studying the >>>>>>> original ebay component we will have to study your new work and verify >>>>>>> if the new component implements all the features covered by the old one >>>>>>> and in the same way; if this will not be true... I don't know what we >>>>>>> will do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kind regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let us first complete the new component and get it fully tested and >>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>> restart this discussion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Hans >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 19:46 -0800, Scott Gray wrote: >>>>>>>>> Okay so once I saw this I took the 5 minutes necessary to look at >>>>>>>>> eBay's services and start thinking that this commit is a bad idea. >>>>>>>>> Please correct me if any of the following is wrong: >>>>>>>>> - When you originally brought this up, you described the problem as >>>>>>>>> one of XML vs. API but I think what you actually meant is eBay SDK >>>>>>>>> vs. using XML directly? >>>>>>>>> - You mentioned that the API (SDK) provides additional functionality >>>>>>>>> but it appears to me that it simply abstracts the use of raw SOAP or >>>>>>>>> XML when interacting with the actual API? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Based on this I'm not sure that we should have separate components >>>>>>>>> but that the XML based component should just be moved to using the >>>>>>>>> SDK (assuming there are only advantages and no disadvantages in doing >>>>>>>>> so). Doing anything else will just result in twice as much code to >>>>>>>>> maintain with both components doing the same thing (or worse yet, >>>>>>>>> similar things but with huge differences in implementation from the >>>>>>>>> user's perspective). Converting the existing XML integration to use >>>>>>>>> the SDK will ensure that we have a single solution in place and that >>>>>>>>> no functionality in the existing component is lost. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> Scott >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> HotWax Media >>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2/02/2010, at 7:16 PM, hans...@apache.org wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Author: hansbak >>>>>>>>>> Date: Wed Feb 3 03:16:07 2010 >>>>>>>>>> New Revision: 905876 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=905876&view=rev >>>>>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>>>>> move the java api functions from the existing ebay component to the >>>>>>>>>> new ebaystore component: no functional changes >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates >>> >> > -- > Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
