I tend to agree with Jacques in this case. The behavior of /plugins is identical to the behavior of /hot-deploy. You can put your component here or there without a problem. So given that /plugins achieves more, which is automatic control of plugins through the plugins API, I think we should prefer to have only one way of extending OFBiz functionality.
Hence, my recommendation is to delete /hot-deploy and remove the component-loading logic affected by that. On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Wai <bzb.of...@gmail.com> wrote: > This discussion is in reference to... > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9244 > http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-td4702922.html > > Now that plugins has been implemented, would hot-deploy be necessary? > > As I've mentions in OFBIZ-9244, I think keeping hot-deploy would be useful > for those that are prototyping new components that might or might not be > open sourced later. My view is that the plugins directory are for open > sourced or commercial components that could be downloaded from known > repositories. Whereas, the hot-deploy directory is for local > developments/prototypings. From an in-house developer's view point with > multiple proprietary components in development, I find that mixing in-house > and downloadable components confusing. I.e. difficult to locate my own > components in the midst of all the available downloaded components (there > are 12 of them). > > On the other hand, Jacques Le Roux takes the position that all plugins > (open > sourced, commercial, in-house prototypes) should all be located in one > place. > > You opinions are greatly appreciated. > > Kind regards, > Wai > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble. > com/discussion-With-plugins-is-hot-deploy-necessary-tp4702976.html > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
