date:20170125

Re: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux


https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13402

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 10:13, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Tests pass on Ubuntu locally. Buildbot runs also on Ubuntu (though newer 
version).

So I'm now pretty sure it's a setting in Buildbot which has changed. I'll see 
with infra. Please devs until it's fixed refer to your local builds

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 09:06, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Mmm, there is definitely an embarrassment with Buildbot after r1780133 
https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk

I though don't see how it could be related with your changes and as it works 
perfectly locally (even on Win7!) I guess it's rather on Buildbot.

I'll check and see with infra if I can't find it by myself...

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 07:55, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Jinghai,

You are welcome, I'll have a look ASAP (not right now, I must move)

Cheers

Jacques

PS: No worries, it works here (locally on Win7) so it's a Builbot hiccup, I'll 
check that



Le 25/01/2017 à 04:59, Shi Jinghai a écrit :

Hmm, I read the log and found some errors. I don't know how to resolve these 
problems.

This error is the first one and I guess it causes other errors:
Jan 25, 2017 3:14:06 AM org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol init
SEVERE: Failed to initialize end point associated with ProtocolHandler 
["http-nio-8080"]
java.net.BindException: Address already in use

I need Jacques's help ... HELP ...

-邮件原件-
发件人: build...@apache.org [mailto:build...@apache.org]
发送时间: 2017年1月25日 11:18
收件人: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
主题: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder ofbiz-trunk while building . 
Full details are available at:
 https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk/builds/1861

Buildbot URL: https://ci.apache.org/

Buildslave for this Build: silvanus_ubuntu

Build Reason: The AnyBranchScheduler scheduler named 'on-ofbiz-commit' 
triggered this build Build Source Stamp: [branch ofbiz/trunk] 1780133
Blamelist: shijh

BUILD FAILED: failed shell_1

Sincerely,
  -The Buildbot

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Was just a friendly information :)

Le 25/01/2017 à 22:11, Michael Brohl a écrit :

*sigh*

That is completely off topic, Jacques...

Am 25.01.17 um 20:48 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

Thanks Michael,

Your message is stamped by the by the seal of reason

BTW about stamping, Thunderbird tells me that your email certificate is invalid
(was OK yesterday)

Jacques

Le 25/01/2017 à 15:58, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

inline...

Am 25.01.17 um 10:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

You are right, it's time to start a new thread, this one is now too confusing.

Jonathan (Schikowski) just told me he will answer us today. I'll wait his answer to start this new thread. It will not be only about demos since
it seems we are ready to discuss of that again.

It's a good approach to start with a fresh discussion and to collect the
requirements.

Starting from that, we should analyze what can be used from standard OFBiz to meet these requirements, what's been missing and what should be
changed. I hope that Anil can help us there, he had a strong opinion in the discussions of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312

We should also analyze the ecomseo approach and see what it adds to solve the requirements. The original contributors might be of help to explain
why they have chosen this approach.

I'm in favor to stay as objective as possible to get the best out of the contributions. A "my solution is better than yours" discussion does not
help.

We should also expect that it will take some time to collect and discuss everything and should not force it to a quick solution. That won't help
either.

And we must be focused leaving out sidenotes or widening the topic too far from the main topic. That will only lead to confusion and possibly end
discussions without result.

A wiki page might help to note and summarize the findings of the conceptual work and to give contributors an overview (instead of digging through
a long email thread).

Also I just stumbled upon this "Ecommerce Portal Enhancement" Rishi's message
by chance http://markmail.org/message/i35qxjelze2x4sja.

It shows there are interests in ecomseo and Rishi started with very useful
elements I think and others added some also.

It's an interesting discussion but we should not pull it into this topic (see
above).

Jacques

Regards,
Michael

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Michael Brohl


*sigh*

That is completely off topic, Jacques...


Am 25.01.17 um 20:48 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

Thanks Michael,

Your message is stamped by the by the seal of reason

BTW about stamping, Thunderbird tells me that your email certificate 
is invalid (was OK yesterday)


Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 15:58, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

inline...

Am 25.01.17 um 10:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
You are right, it's time to start a new thread, this one is now too 
confusing.


Jonathan (Schikowski) just told me he will answer us today. I'll 
wait his answer to start this new thread. It will not be only about 
demos since it seems we are ready to discuss of that again.
It's a good approach to start with a fresh discussion and to collect 
the requirements.


Starting from that, we should analyze what can be used from standard 
OFBiz to meet these requirements, what's been missing and what should 
be changed. I hope that Anil can help us there, he had a strong 
opinion in the discussions of 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312


We should also analyze the ecomseo approach and see what it adds to 
solve the requirements. The original contributors might be of help to 
explain why they have chosen this approach.


I'm in favor to stay as objective as possible to get the best out of 
the contributions. A "my solution is better than yours" discussion 
does not help.


We should also expect that it will take some time to collect and 
discuss everything and should not force it to a quick solution. That 
won't help either.


And we must be focused leaving out sidenotes or widening the topic 
too far from the main topic. That will only lead to confusion and 
possibly end discussions without result.


A wiki page might help to note and summarize the findings of the 
conceptual work and to give contributors an overview (instead of 
digging through a long email thread).




Also I just stumbled upon this "Ecommerce Portal Enhancement" 
Rishi's message by chance http://markmail.org/message/i35qxjelze2x4sja.


It shows there are interests in ecomseo and Rishi started with very 
useful elements I think and others added some also.
It's an interesting discussion but we should not pull it into this 
topic (see above).




Jacques


Regards,
Michael









smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Thanks Michael,

Your message is stamped by the by the seal of reason

BTW about stamping, Thunderbird tells me that your email certificate is invalid
(was OK yesterday)

Jacques

Le 25/01/2017 à 15:58, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

inline...

Am 25.01.17 um 10:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:

You are right, it's time to start a new thread, this one is now too confusing.

Jonathan (Schikowski) just told me he will answer us today. I'll wait his answer to start this new thread. It will not be only about demos since it
seems we are ready to discuss of that again.

It's a good approach to start with a fresh discussion and to collect the
requirements.

We should also analyze the ecomseo approach and see what it adds to solve the requirements. The original contributors might be of help to explain
why they have chosen this approach.

I'm in favor to stay as objective as possible to get the best out of the contributions. A
"my solution is better than yours" discussion does not help.

We should also expect that it will take some time to collect and discuss everything and should not force it to a quick solution. That won't help
either.

And we must be focused leaving out sidenotes or widening the topic too far from the main topic. That will only lead to confusion and possibly end
discussions without result.

A wiki page might help to note and summarize the findings of the conceptual work and to give contributors an overview (instead of digging through a
long email thread).

Also I just stumbled upon this "Ecommerce Portal Enhancement" Rishi's message
by chance http://markmail.org/message/i35qxjelze2x4sja.

It shows there are interests in ecomseo and Rishi started with very useful
elements I think and others added some also.

It's an interesting discussion but we should not pull it into this topic (see
above).

Jacques

Regards,
Michael

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Michael Brohl


Hi Jacques,

inline...

Am 25.01.17 um 10:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
You are right, it's time to start a new thread, this one is now too 
confusing.


Jonathan (Schikowski) just told me he will answer us today. I'll wait 
his answer to start this new thread. It will not be only about demos 
since it seems we are ready to discuss of that again.
It's a good approach to start with a fresh discussion and to collect the 
requirements.


Starting from that, we should analyze what can be used from standard 
OFBiz to meet these requirements, what's been missing and what should be 
changed. I hope that Anil can help us there, he had a strong opinion in 
the discussions of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312


We should also analyze the ecomseo approach and see what it adds to 
solve the requirements. The original contributors might be of help to 
explain why they have chosen this approach.


I'm in favor to stay as objective as possible to get the best out of the 
contributions. A "my solution is better than yours" discussion does not 
help.


We should also expect that it will take some time to collect and discuss 
everything and should not force it to a quick solution. That won't help 
either.


And we must be focused leaving out sidenotes or widening the topic too 
far from the main topic. That will only lead to confusion and possibly 
end discussions without result.


A wiki page might help to note and summarize the findings of the 
conceptual work and to give contributors an overview (instead of digging 
through a long email thread).




Also I just stumbled upon this "Ecommerce Portal Enhancement" Rishi's 
message by chance http://markmail.org/message/i35qxjelze2x4sja.


It shows there are interests in ecomseo and Rishi started with very 
useful elements I think and others added some also.
It's an interesting discussion but we should not pull it into this topic 
(see above).




Jacques


Regards,
Michael



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux


Tests pass on Ubuntu locally. Buildbot runs also on Ubuntu (though newer 
version).

So I'm now pretty sure it's a setting in Buildbot which has changed. I'll see 
with infra. Please devs until it's fixed refer to your local builds

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 09:06, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Mmm, there is definitely an embarrassment with Buildbot after r1780133 
https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk

I though don't see how it could be related with your changes and as it works 
perfectly locally (even on Win7!) I guess it's rather on Buildbot.

I'll check and see with infra if I can't find it by myself...

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 07:55, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Jinghai,

You are welcome, I'll have a look ASAP (not right now, I must move)

Cheers

Jacques

PS: No worries, it works here (locally on Win7) so it's a Builbot hiccup, I'll 
check that



Le 25/01/2017 à 04:59, Shi Jinghai a écrit :

Hmm, I read the log and found some errors. I don't know how to resolve these 
problems.

This error is the first one and I guess it causes other errors:
Jan 25, 2017 3:14:06 AM org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol init
SEVERE: Failed to initialize end point associated with ProtocolHandler 
["http-nio-8080"]
java.net.BindException: Address already in use

I need Jacques's help ... HELP ...

-邮件原件-
发件人: build...@apache.org [mailto:build...@apache.org]
发送时间: 2017年1月25日 11:18
收件人: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
主题: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder ofbiz-trunk while building . 
Full details are available at:
 https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk/builds/1861

Buildbot URL: https://ci.apache.org/

Buildslave for this Build: silvanus_ubuntu

Build Reason: The AnyBranchScheduler scheduler named 'on-ofbiz-commit' 
triggered this build Build Source Stamp: [branch ofbiz/trunk] 1780133
Blamelist: shijh

BUILD FAILED: failed shell_1

Sincerely,
  -The Buildbot

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux


Le 25/01/2017 à 09:54, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

Sorry, but some facts can't sometimes be avoided. Here I think they help
others to better understand ecomseo history.


Providing objective context information is useful; but some of your
sentences didn't achieve that goal.

Jacopo


Right! Humans make errors :)

Jacques

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux

You are right, it's time to start a new thread, this one is now too confusing.

Jonathan (Schikowski) just told me he will answer us today. I'll wait his answer to start this new thread. It will not be only about demos since it
seems we are ready to discuss of that again.

Also I just stumbled upon this "Ecommerce Portal Enhancement" Rishi's message
by chance http://markmail.org/message/i35qxjelze2x4sja.

It shows there are interests in ecomseo and Rishi started with very useful
elements I think and others added some also.

Jacques

Le 25/01/2017 à 09:29, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

Jacques I'm lost! The message we are discussing is how to handle the two
ecommerce webapps, and you are going all over the place by talking about
things like:

- a historical argument about ecomseo
- an OFBiz fork
- community over code
- human

What does all of the above have to do with what we are discussing?

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

Hi Taher,

Le 25/01/2017 à 08:03, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

I think you might be mixing up "multiple webapps" with "duplicate /
entangled webapps" in your examples. Yes we probably have other things to
get rid of, but I think we should avoid working in the direction of
increasing the entanglements instead of fixing root causes.

Sincerely I was really proud of myself when I thought about and
implemented this solution (then temporary in my mind). When Anil kinda
imposed a veto on ecomseo and I had no time to prove that we could still
use the contents way with ecomseo.

I still see it as something very clean which allows to easily compare the
2 solutions w/o any burden on the legacy.

Anyway, my intention was then indeed to compare and argument to replace
the ecommerce webapp by ecomseo (which would then be renamed ecommerce). It
seems we are ready for that, are we?

Also I don't see the point of bringing comments about a different

discussion and references to a fork of OFBiz to this discussion and rant
about it?

Human, I'm an human not a robot.

This remembers a joke we had with Andrew Sykes in the early days. A lot of
the code we still rely on has been writing by Andrew Zenesky (you cleaned
some of it). We were "wondering" if actually Andrew (Zenesky) was not
actually a robot. Because of the speed he was writing code!

See? Human, "Community over code"[1][2] :)

Jacques
[1] http://communityovercode.com/
[2] http://theapacheway.com/

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

This argument looks more like a witch hunt to me.

If you both think it's a valid argument against ecomseo then what about

accounting, ar and ap webapps in accounting component

ofbizsetup and ordermgr-js webapps in commonext component

content and contentimages in content component

marketing and sfa in marketing component

facility and catalog in product component

ical and workeffort in workeffort component

What are your plans for those? We might decide to change that but it's so
far a feature not a bug.

We dropped the ecomclone which was just showing how to reuse a webapp in
another webapp. I agreed about dropping it because ecomseo was also
showing
the same feature. We can simply document it w/o showing an example in
code.
I would not be against but we then need to document it in both readme and
wiki.

Now I can also agree about unifying the ecommerce component and then we
need to compare the 2 webapps which are very similar. Actually we "only"
need to compare the filters and servlets in both and decide which are the
best.

I think, but have not tested, that you can use content in ecomseo has it
was abruptly advocated by Hans[1] and Anil[2]. Else we can merge this
feature from ecommerce to ecomseo filters and servlet.

BTW, I don't see good practises in Hans's and Anil's answers and sorry to
say but I think the best answer then was from the regretted Adrian[3]

Since then ilscipio has its fork[4][5] and will not contribute anything
anymore, well done experts!

So you see there is some resentments about this.

Yes, people worked hard to contribute it with some other main features
like "Solr" OFBIZ-5042

But I think we can go ahead and find a common ground for the best or the
project, which is only what I have in mind.

Jacques
[1] http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Proposal-URL-Generation-Ch
anges-tp4639289p4639294.html
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312?focusedComm
entId=13939116=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta
bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13939116
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312?focusedComm
entId=13942316=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta
bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13942316
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scipio_ERP
[5] http://www.scipioerp.com/

Le 24/01/2017 à 21:24, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

Small correction, I meant one component with two webapps

On Jan 24, 2017 11:21 PM, "Taher Alkhateeb"

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacopo Cappellato

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry, but some facts can't sometimes be avoided. Here I think they help
> others to better understand ecomseo history.
>

Providing objective context information is useful; but some of your
sentences didn't achieve that goal.

Jacopo

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Taher Alkhateeb

Jacques I'm lost! The message we are discussing is how to handle the two
ecommerce webapps, and you are going all over the place by talking about
things like:

- a historical argument about ecomseo
- an OFBiz fork
- community over code
- human

What does all of the above have to do with what we are discussing?

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

> Hi Taher,
>
> Le 25/01/2017 à 08:03, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>
>> Hi Jacques,
>>
>> I think you might be mixing up "multiple webapps" with "duplicate /
>> entangled webapps" in your examples. Yes we probably have other things to
>> get rid of, but I think we should avoid working in the direction of
>> increasing the entanglements instead of fixing root causes.
>>
>
> Sincerely I was really proud of myself when I thought about and
> implemented this solution (then temporary in my mind). When Anil kinda
> imposed a veto on ecomseo and I had no time to prove that we could still
> use the contents way with ecomseo.
>
> I still see it as something very clean which allows to easily compare the
> 2 solutions w/o any burden on the legacy.
>
> Anyway, my intention was then indeed to compare and argument to replace
> the ecommerce webapp by ecomseo (which would then be renamed ecommerce). It
> seems we are ready for that, are we?
>
>
> Also I don't see the point of bringing comments about a different
>> discussion and references to a fork of OFBiz to this discussion and rant
>> about it?
>>
>
> Human, I'm an human not a robot.
>
> This remembers a joke we had with Andrew Sykes in the early days. A lot of
> the code we still rely on has been writing by Andrew Zenesky (you cleaned
> some of it). We were "wondering" if actually Andrew (Zenesky) was not
> actually a robot. Because of the speed he was writing code!
>
> See? Human, "Community over code"[1][2] :)
>
> Jacques
> [1] http://communityovercode.com/
> [2] http://theapacheway.com/
>
>
>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
>> jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>
>> This argument looks more like a witch hunt to me.
>>>
>>> If you both think it's a valid argument against ecomseo then what  about
>>>
>>> accounting, ar and ap webapps in accounting component
>>>
>>> ofbizsetup and ordermgr-js webapps in commonext component
>>>
>>> content and contentimages in content component
>>>
>>> marketing and sfa in marketing component
>>>
>>> facility and catalog in product component
>>>
>>> ical and workeffort in workeffort component
>>>
>>> What are your plans for those? We might decide to change that but it's so
>>> far a feature not a bug.
>>>
>>> We dropped the ecomclone which was just showing how to reuse a webapp in
>>> another webapp. I agreed about dropping it because ecomseo was also
>>> showing
>>> the same feature. We can simply document it w/o showing an example in
>>> code.
>>> I would not be against but we then need to document it in both readme and
>>> wiki.
>>>
>>> Now I can also agree about unifying the ecommerce component and then we
>>> need to compare the 2 webapps which are very similar. Actually we "only"
>>> need to compare the filters and servlets in both and decide which are the
>>> best.
>>>
>>> I think, but have not tested, that you can use content in ecomseo has it
>>> was abruptly advocated by Hans[1] and Anil[2]. Else we can merge this
>>> feature from ecommerce to ecomseo filters and servlet.
>>>
>>> BTW, I don't see good practises in Hans's and Anil's answers and sorry to
>>> say but I think the best answer then was from the regretted Adrian[3]
>>>
>>> Since then ilscipio has its fork[4][5] and will not contribute anything
>>> anymore, well done experts!
>>>
>>> So you see there is some resentments about this.
>>>
>>> Yes, people worked hard to contribute it with some other main features
>>> like "Solr" OFBIZ-5042
>>>
>>> But I think we can go ahead and find a common ground for the best or the
>>> project, which is only what I have in mind.
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>> [1] http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Proposal-URL-Generation-Ch
>>> anges-tp4639289p4639294.html
>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312?focusedComm
>>> entId=13939116=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta
>>> bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13939116
>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312?focusedComm
>>> entId=13942316=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta
>>> bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13942316
>>> [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scipio_ERP
>>> [5] http://www.scipioerp.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 24/01/2017 à 21:24, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>>>
>>> Small correction, I meant one component with two webapps

 On Jan 24, 2017 11:21 PM, "Taher Alkhateeb" 
 wrote:

 I have to agree with Scott, the approach here is wrong in my opinion. My

> definition of mess is simple: you should not have two components with
> two
> webapps.  A real root solution is to unify

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux

Hi Taher,

Le 25/01/2017 à 08:03, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

Sincerely I was really proud of myself when I thought about and implemented this solution (then temporary in my mind). When Anil kinda imposed a veto
on ecomseo and I had no time to prove that we could still use the contents way with ecomseo.

I still see it as something very clean which allows to easily compare the 2
solutions w/o any burden on the legacy.

Anyway, my intention was then indeed to compare and argument to replace the ecommerce webapp by ecomseo (which would then be renamed ecommerce). It
seems we are ready for that, are we?

Also I don't see the point of bringing comments about a different
discussion and references to a fork of OFBiz to this discussion and rant
about it?

Human, I'm an human not a robot.

This remembers a joke we had with Andrew Sykes in the early days. A lot of the code we still rely on has been writing by Andrew Zenesky (you cleaned
some of it). We were "wondering" if actually Andrew (Zenesky) was not actually a robot. Because of the speed he was writing code!

See? Human, "Community over code"[1][2] :)

Jacques
[1] http://communityovercode.com/
[2] http://theapacheway.com/

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:

This argument looks more like a witch hunt to me.

If you both think it's a valid argument against ecomseo then what about

accounting, ar and ap webapps in accounting component

ofbizsetup and ordermgr-js webapps in commonext component

content and contentimages in content component

marketing and sfa in marketing component

facility and catalog in product component

ical and workeffort in workeffort component

What are your plans for those? We might decide to change that but it's so
far a feature not a bug.

We dropped the ecomclone which was just showing how to reuse a webapp in
another webapp. I agreed about dropping it because ecomseo was also showing
the same feature. We can simply document it w/o showing an example in code.
I would not be against but we then need to document it in both readme and
wiki.

I think, but have not tested, that you can use content in ecomseo has it
was abruptly advocated by Hans[1] and Anil[2]. Else we can merge this
feature from ecommerce to ecomseo filters and servlet.

BTW, I don't see good practises in Hans's and Anil's answers and sorry to
say but I think the best answer then was from the regretted Adrian[3]

Since then ilscipio has its fork[4][5] and will not contribute anything
anymore, well done experts!

So you see there is some resentments about this.

Yes, people worked hard to contribute it with some other main features
like "Solr" OFBIZ-5042

But I think we can go ahead and find a common ground for the best or the
project, which is only what I have in mind.

Le 24/01/2017 à 21:24, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :

Small correction, I meant one component with two webapps

On Jan 24, 2017 11:21 PM, "Taher Alkhateeb"
wrote:

I have to agree with Scott, the approach here is wrong in my opinion. My

definition of mess is simple: you should not have two components with two
webapps. A real root solution is to unify the ecommerce component with
one
webapp exposed instead of having all this hairy code and
interdependencies.
I also think this should be discussed more rather than just committed
without a thorough review.

On Jan 24, 2017 11:12 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com>
wrote:

Inline...

Le 24/09/2016 à 06:20, Scott Gray a écrit :

You're asking for opinions and I can't give one without any knowledge of

this feature so I'm simply telling you that the lack of documentation
is
a
hindrance to evaluation and adoption. I took a quick look at
SeoConfig.xml
and have no idea what most of it does.

You don't need to change SeoConfig.xml by default.

It seems to me that the comment there are not worse, and even better,
than you generally find in such config or

Re: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux


Mmm, there is definitely an embarrassment with Buildbot after r1780133 
https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk

I though don't see how it could be related with your changes and as it works 
perfectly locally (even on Win7!) I guess it's rather on Buildbot.

I'll check and see with infra if I can't find it by myself...

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 07:55, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Hi Jinghai,

You are welcome, I'll have a look ASAP (not right now, I must move)

Cheers

Jacques

PS: No worries, it works here (locally on Win7) so it's a Builbot hiccup, I'll 
check that



Le 25/01/2017 à 04:59, Shi Jinghai a écrit :

Hmm, I read the log and found some errors. I don't know how to resolve these 
problems.

This error is the first one and I guess it causes other errors:
Jan 25, 2017 3:14:06 AM org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol init
SEVERE: Failed to initialize end point associated with ProtocolHandler 
["http-nio-8080"]
java.net.BindException: Address already in use

I need Jacques's help ... HELP ...

-邮件原件-
发件人: build...@apache.org [mailto:build...@apache.org]
发送时间: 2017年1月25日 11:18
收件人: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
主题: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder ofbiz-trunk while building . 
Full details are available at:
 https://ci.apache.org/builders/ofbiz-trunk/builds/1861

Buildbot URL: https://ci.apache.org/

Buildslave for this Build: silvanus_ubuntu

Build Reason: The AnyBranchScheduler scheduler named 'on-ofbiz-commit' 
triggered this build Build Source Stamp: [branch ofbiz/trunk] 1780133
Blamelist: shijh

BUILD FAILED: failed shell_1

Sincerely,
  -The Buildbot

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

2017-01-25 Thread Jacques Le Roux


Thanks Jacopo,

Sorry, but some facts can't sometimes be avoided. Here I think they help others 
to better understand ecomseo history.

But you are right, better to focus on going ahead together.

For instance I really appreciate Paul's (Foxworthy) last answer on OFBIZ-5312 
https://s.apache.org/fN7R, that's productive!

Jacques


Le 25/01/2017 à 08:23, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

Hi Jacques,

please see inline:

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:


This argument looks more like a witch hunt to me.


[...]


BTW, I don't see good practises in Hans's and Anil's answers


[...]


Since then ilscipio has its fork[4][5] and will not contribute anything
anymore, well done experts!


[...]


So you see there is some resentments about this.


[...]

I have extracted some the sentences above from your message because I think
they are a bad example of dealing with disagreement: they do not add any
useful technical content and are going to raise the temperature of the
thread and maybe resurrect an years old and ugly discussion.
Not useful at all.

On the other hand:



Now I can also agree about unifying the ecommerce component and then we
need to compare the 2 webapps which are very similar. Actually we "only"
need to compare the filters and servlets in both and decide which are the
best.

[...] But I think we can go ahead and find a common ground for the best or

the project, which is only what I have in mind.


with the two sentences above you have provided a good summary of what I
consider a positive and productive output of this discussion and also a
message that shows a positive attitude.

My advice, for you and others interested in this thread, is to focus on the
latter and refrain from commenting on the former.

Jacopo

Re: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

Re: buildbot failure in on ofbiz-trunk

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

13 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information