Le 12/09/2014 09:25, Pierre Smits a écrit :
Interesting observations in that openhub evaluation. Something to think
about!
Though it seems Openhub only refers to comments in Java, we have a lot of
comments in XML
It was just an example to explain why I'd like to follow Nicolas's suggestion
and add explaining comments in log4j2.xml
Jacques
Didn't know it existed. How OFBiz is perceived by others should be part of
the considerations regarding future roadmaps and (short term) plans.
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
The point with embedded documentation (in OOTB files) is, as long as it's
not in often changed files (where you have to be sure the documentation is
well maintained), you have it up to date at hand, without having to search
online which might be not always available (like Git is now often preferred
over svn for this reason)
And morevoer I don't see why we would not update embedded documentation,
it's as important as code, it's actually part of it. This reflects for
instance in project evaluation like does https://www.openhub.net/p/
Apache-OFBiz/factoids#FactoidCommentsLow
But who cares anyway? :/ It seems nobody got the importance and value of
error.log in the dev community, I really wonder about that!
Jacques
Le 12/09/2014 09:03, Pierre Smits a écrit :
That, or otherwise improve the OFBiz documentation regarding logging.
Referring to documentation on other sites is not enough.
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:40 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
Since Jacopo did not answer, here is my proposition. We could, as
suggested Nicolas, add some educational comments in log4j2.xml and add 2
commented out sections for error.log
Agreed?
Jacques
Le 09/09/2014 15:10, Pierre Smits a écrit :
And for whom
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
Op 9 sep. 2014 om 14:23 heeft Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> het volgende geschreven:
Le 09/09/2014 13:26, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
Le 09/09/2014 12:41, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
This is the main reason the trunk should be kept as clean as
possible,
instead of changing stuff to fit committers' personal preferences.
It's clear and good to simplify the configuration on production
site.
On some other projet (mostly on debian ;) ), configuration file
contains few enable element but so mostly commented configurations
with
context explication of the reason to use it.
With a good text editor (notepad no match) it's also clear and simple
and help uncover some other view.
No I don't use trunk for my configuration, I have my own parameters
with my own method to deploy them :)
Nicolas
That's a very interesting point Nicolas. The problem is now to know
what means "as clean as possible" in Jacopo's sentence above
Jacques
