Relax, I have no intention of reverting your commit without you first agreeing to it.
I would only attempt to revert something if I thought it was grossly inappropriate for it to be in the repository (such as link to a personal twitter account). This is just a small issue that for some strange reason requires 50+ emails to resolve. Regards Scott On 10/07/2010, at 9:34 PM, Hans Bakker wrote: > 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. >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
