please read the message i just sent you I mean the current system today. do not start a revert war, i will follow no problem.
Regards, Hans On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 21:30 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > Since you no longer want to discuss the matter I assume that you are okay for > the code to be changed? > > Thanks > Scott > > On 10/07/2010, at 9:21 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > > > You never do give up, do you. > > i think the current system is a nice workable solution which does not > > need to be changed. That is my last comment. > > > > Regards, > > Hans > > > > On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 21:02 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > >> That's why we comment it out, the only reason you were affected was > >> because it wasn't commented out. The business user never even has to know > >> that it exists. > >> > >> If your argument now is that at some point in the future a committer will > >> accidentally uncomment the setting, then I think you are clutching at > >> straws and doing your best not to come to a reasonable solution. > >> > >> Regards > >> Scott > >> > >> On 10/07/2010, at 8:50 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >> > >>> I still think the problem for the business user is still much higher > >>> then the not "intuitive" problem for the experienced technical user. A > >>> parameter in web.xml is easily "forgotten" which actually started this > >>> whole discussion. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Hans > >>> > >>> On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 20:42 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>> You are yet to explain why simply commenting out the web app settings in > >>>> the trunk will not solve your problem. If that is done then the > >>>> "business" reasons will take priority by default. > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> Scott > >>>> > >>>> On 10/07/2010, at 8:34 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> can only repeat what i said: I think he the business reasons should take > >>>>> priority and leave the system as it is now. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Hans > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 20:07 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>>>> Of course I just made it up, that doesn't make it an invalid scenario > >>>>>> though. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Like I said, your "business" problem can easily be solved without the > >>>>>> changes you made. Simply revert your commit and instead comment out > >>>>>> the settings in the web.xml files and commit that. Problem solved, > >>>>>> everybody is happy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards > >>>>>> Scott > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 10/07/2010, at 7:54 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sorry Scott, you simply trying to find a reason you just made up now, > >>>>>>> Business reasons still more important , is my opinion. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> thanks for your reply, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Hans > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I is extremely far fledged and still think the business user take > >>>>>>> priority here. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 19:32 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>>>>>> If the setting is commented out in all OOTB web.xml files then a > >>>>>>>> non-techincal user will never be bothered by it, case closed. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> As for why you would ever want to override widget.verbose=true: > >>>>>>>> Let's say you have a staging instance deployed on a test server and > >>>>>>>> active development and debugging is still taking place. Let's say > >>>>>>>> that as part of your testing you want to test your ecommerce page > >>>>>>>> load times, sizes and effects of page compression. Now to do that, > >>>>>>>> you want to be able to turn off the widget boundary comments for > >>>>>>>> ecommerce but you want to do it without effecting the other > >>>>>>>> developers who are working on the back-end applications. > >>>>>>>> In this case you can turn off the boundary comments in the ecommerce > >>>>>>>> webapp's web.xml file and still have all other applications display > >>>>>>>> them. I mean wow, what a wonderfully flexible system. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> How does that sound? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>> Scott > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 10/07/2010, at 7:17 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Tell me when you would ever want to override a widget.verbose=true > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>> widget.properties? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> For a business user or a user hosting the application it is > >>>>>>>>> important > >>>>>>>>> that when he sets it to true, he wants to see the comments > >>>>>>>>> irrespective > >>>>>>>>> of web.xml buried deep down in the system > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> What is more important? > >>>>>>>>> 1. a capable technical use who does not find it "intuitive" > >>>>>>>>> 2. a business/hosting user who is wondering why the comments are not > >>>>>>>>> displayed although he has set the parameter in the widget.properties > >>>>>>>>> file to true? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> business reasons are most(all?) of the time more important than the > >>>>>>>>> technical reasons > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>> Hans > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 17:49 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> I don't see a huge problem with your change but I have to admit > >>>>>>>>>> that I don't remember what your change actually does. There is a > >>>>>>>>>> reason why I don't remember though, because it isn't intuitive. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> With the way things were before, it was easy to understand: > >>>>>>>>>> context overrides web.xml overrides widget.properties > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> See how clean that is? I won't ever forget it because it makes > >>>>>>>>>> sense. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> You have yet to explain why the way things were before your change > >>>>>>>>>> was harmful and couldn't have simply been solved by commenting out > >>>>>>>>>> the web.xml setting in the trunk and adding some documenting > >>>>>>>>>> comments. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>>> Scott > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 10/07/2010, at 5:40 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> You still not give me a business reason why the change i did was > >>>>>>>>>>> harmful > >>>>>>>>>>> or break anything. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 17:02 +1200, Scott Gray wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/07/2010, at 4:00 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Before also true could be overridden which was painfully shown > >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> example component not showing comments. I see no valid business > >>>>>>>>>>>>> reason > >>>>>>>>>>>>> why we should have that. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Let's be clear, there was no problem with the way it worked > >>>>>>>>>>>> before, changing the setting in the web.xml of your webapp > >>>>>>>>>>>> solved the problem you were having. > >>>>>>>>>>>> IMO we could easily solve this discussion by reverting your > >>>>>>>>>>>> changes, commenting out the setting in the example and template > >>>>>>>>>>>> webapps and then adding a comment explaining what it does. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Having the additional setting in the web.xml does no harm unless > >>>>>>>>>>>> it is set to false and someone doesn't know about it. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Everything worked fine before but the problem was the lack of > >>>>>>>>>>>> visibility of the settings. We should make it so that the > >>>>>>>>>>>> web.xml is only ever set to false on purpose, in custom > >>>>>>>>>>>> deployments. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I also added documentation to support this, because that was > >>>>>>>>>>>>> also a week > >>>>>>>>>>>>> point of the original change. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hans > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 22:26 -0500, Adam Heath wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hans Bakker wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adrian. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the second time you do not reply to what I write. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is not helpful. If you believe someone hasn't understood > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have said, then don't just respond saying that you didn't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand. You should re-explain it in a different way. If > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> was understanding the first time, then you wouldn't need to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> state > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that. So, it's obvious that you feel that you weren't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understood, so > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you need to re-explain yourself. Only you know what you were > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to say. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (this is a general rule to follow; if you try to explain > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> something to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone, and they don't get it, saying it the same way again, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> saying you just don't get it, won't help anyone). > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so no use sending you more arguments. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's a poor word. Why are you sending arguments? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will not revert my changes, of the reasons i gave you. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's awfully combative. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>>>>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>>>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > >>> Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > >>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > >>> > >> > > > > -- > > Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz > > Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak > > Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates. > > > -- Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz Myself on twitter: http://twitter.com/hansbak Antwebsystems.com: Quality services for competitive rates.
