exactly i was saying all along (and as it is now), but i am always in
for a compromise...

Hans

On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 18:22 -0700, David E Jones wrote:
> Based on this I'm actually reconsidering my position, however the current 
> implementation is still not adequate.
> 
> It sounds like the goal for the widget.properties is to make it easy to go 
> into production and make sure that no boundary comments/etc are added 
> anywhere in the system. To do that effectively you need a single setting for 
> the whole system, and that setting should override everything else (i.e. not 
> even allow for a parameter to be manually added which may expose 
> implementation details that you want to keep hidden).
> 
> For that purpose a property would make sense, but the logic has to be 
> carefully done (not the shallow logic that has been discussed so far). It 
> would need to be something like: if (widgetVerbose property == false) then 
> don't show else if (widgetVerbose parameter (using default OFBiz parameters 
> Map, takes into account both URL parameters and web.xml context parameters) 
> == true) then show else don't show.
> 
> In other words, if the widget.properties setting is false, then never show 
> boundary comments. Otherwise, ignore it and use the parameters value if true, 
> and overall default to false.
> 
> Wow, is this really that hard?
> 
> -David
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 12, 2011, at 5:03 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
> 
> > As i wrote before i am fine with this if in the trunk the setting of
> > widget.properties is not overridden by default in web.xml for some
> > component what was the case originally.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Hans
> > 
> > On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 20:02 +0100, Adrian Crum wrote:
> >> David,
> >> 
> >> Keep in mind that the original design is one that you participated in. 
> >> The agreement on the setting precedence in the original Jira issue was 
> >> this:
> >> 
> >> widget.properties -> web.xml -> URL parameters
> >> 
> >> where widget.properties is the global default, which can be overridden 
> >> by a setting in web.xml, which can be overridden by screen widgets or 
> >> scripts or whatever (via the current context Map).
> >> 
> >> The design worked great. Then Hans changed it due to a misunderstanding 
> >> of how the design works. Despite repeated explanations of how the design 
> >> works, and requests from three PMC members to revert his change, he 
> >> refused to change it and threatened the community with a commit war. 
> >> Since then we have had a number of issues reported on the mailing list 
> >> describing how his change makes the setting unusable.
> >> 
> >> It amazes me that a single -1 vote vetoes a change in the Apache 
> >> community, but three -1 votes from PMC members can't revert this obvious 
> >> break in software design.
> >> 
> >> -Adrian
> >> 
> >> On 9/12/2011 7:24 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> >>> No. The approach suggested by (and committed by) Hans is that the 
> >>> setting in the widget.properties file overrides any other setting.
> >>> 
> >>> -Adrian
> >>> 
> >>> On 9/12/2011 6:19 PM, David E Jones wrote:
> >>>> No one agrees with which approach? The approach that if you pass a 
> >>>> widgetVerbose=true HTTP parameter that it should override the 
> >>>> widget.properties setting? I agree with that approach…
> >>>> 
> >>>> -David
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> That's the problem - no one agrees with that approach.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> -Adrian
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On 9/12/2011 1:53 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>>>>> I think I forgot to forward Hans's answer
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Jacques
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Hans Bakker wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 05:15 +0200, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>>>>>>> widget.properties's widget.verbose setting has precedence over 
> >>>>>>>> web.xml's widgetVerbose setting. So you can't use
> >>>>>>>> parameters.widgetVerbose to override widget.verbose to false. Is 
> >>>>>>>> ModelWidget.widgetBoundaryCommentsEnabled() written this way for
> >>>>>>>> some reasons?
> >>>>>>> there was a lengthly discussion of this. As long as by default the
> >>>>>>> properties file is not overridden in web.xml is fine either way.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Another issue is that these HTML boundary comments get outputted 
> >>>>>>>> even though the view handler is set to "screencsv". In the
> >>>>>>>> widget-screen.xsd, the only way to invoke a template to produce 
> >>>>>>>> CSV is using<html><html-template />, but this always adds HTML
> >>>>>>>> comments even if the output is CSV (see HtmlWidget class). Maybe 
> >>>>>>>> we could introduce a<csv>  element or something like that?
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Anyway, both of those problems combined mean that there are no 
> >>>>>>>> apparent clean ways to remove the HTML "template begin/end"
> >>>>>>>> boundary comments from the CSV output if you try to draw it with 
> >>>>>>>> an *.ftl template. A workaround  kludge for now is to invoke
> >>>>>>>> the FTL manually through a Groovy script.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Jacques
> >>>>>> 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
> > Alternative ofbiz website: http://www.ofbiz.info
> > http://www.antwebsystems.com : Quality services for competitive rates.
> > 
> 

-- 
Ofbiz on twitter: http://twitter.com/apache_ofbiz
Alternative ofbiz website: http://www.ofbiz.info
http://www.antwebsystems.com : Quality services for competitive rates.

Reply via email to