Re: Permission service not on the same transaction

Hi Rishi, in line Le 19/09/2016 à 16:20, Rishi Solanki a écrit : Nicolas, "If you are dealing with money, or precision is a must, use BigDecimal. Otherwise Doubles tend to be good enough." That means, for quantity fields double should be fine. But within OFBiz, I see entities like OrderItem, O

Re: Put "Reverts" in the commit template?

Hi Jacopo, What is the logical behind this? It's not the first time I ask and I'd really like to have a clarification. We have "Fix for" and "Documentation". Why not "Fixed" and "Documented"? Thanks Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 19:09, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : I have changed it to "Reverted" f

Re: Apache POI 3.15 released

+1 always to update to stable new releases On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Michael Brohl wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Apache POI 3.15 is released, we are currently using 3.14. > > Should we do an update? > > I'd create a Jira and do this work. > > What do you think? > > Regards, > > Michael > > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Solr 6.2.1 released

I think an update is _always_ a welcomed thing not only for feature set but also security and bug fixes. So always +1 to upgrade to new versions of anything. However, I have to say Solr and Birt are two massive components in terms of dependencies. So while upgrading and fixing compilation errors i

Re: Apache POI 3.15 released

Hi everyone, Apache POI 3.15 is released, we are currently using 3.14. Should we do an update? I'd create a Jira and do this work. What do you think? Regards, Michael Am 22.09.16 um 00:32 schrieb David North: The Apache POI PMC are pleased to announce the release of Apache POI 3.15. For

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Solr 6.2.1 released

Hi everyone, there's an new Solr/Lucene version released. Should we do an update? It will need some refactoring, there are a few compile errors to be solved. I'd create a Jira and do this work if we want to update, what do you think? Regards, Michael Am 20.09.16 um 22:26 schrieb Shalin Shek

Re: Preliminary question about themes before possible votes

Hi Julien, We spoke about having themes like plugins, but I think it was just a small talk so far In 1st place they should go in attic (ie stay in OFBiz trunk in svn repo ) and then possibly resurrected from there as themes-plugins, or not. Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 22:59, Julien NICOLAS a éc

Re: Preliminary question about themes before possible votes

Hi Jacques, I agree that it's important to remove themes from the framework (keep at least one is important ^^ ). But you don't mention what's happening with theme that is not in the OOTB. I think it could be available from public repository instead of simply deleted. For me pors is to sto

Re: Put "Reverts" in the commit template?

I have changed it to "Reverted" for consistency reasons. Jacopo On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > Done > > Jacques > > > Le 18/09/2016 à 11:19, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > >> Hi, >> >> In some cases we need to revert a commit done for a J

Re: Put "Reverts" in the commit template?

Done Jacques Le 18/09/2016 à 11:19, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Hi, In some cases we need to revert a commit done for a Jira after we discover it causes an issue. We have not yet other means that using the fix word. I suggest we put in the "Reverts" (or "Revert for" or "Reverted" as it please

Re: Use ecomseo on demo rather than ecommerce

After 3 day, I consider this a lazy consensus since nobody chimed in and will change accordingly tomorrow Jacques Le 18/09/2016 à 15:27, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Hi, Maybe you don't know about or did not try it, but we have ecomseo a clone of the ecommerce component tailored for SEO https

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Nice that you're trying to keep this alive, Jacques. But there is basically nothing to discuss as it is a done deal. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at

Re: Preliminary question about themes before possible votes

Ah something I missed to precise: it's not about giving arguments, pro or cons. It's only about taking decisions, so again: please stay focused. Thanks Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 18:13, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : Hi All, At OFBIZ-8293 we began to informally discuss about reducing the number of

Preliminary question about themes before possible votes

Hi All, At OFBIZ-8293 we began to informally discuss about reducing the number of OOTB themes. But we could clearly agree and believe a vote is better/ 1. Now the 1st question which has been already discussed several time without a clear decision in this ML: do we, as a community, want to r

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

I'm not against reverting myself. Doing so it also means that everybody agree about continuing to use the FormFieldTitle_ feature So if you really don't like it and have arguments, it's the moment to raise your hand. Before I revert in, say 2 days, and put this discussion back in the limbo Ja

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Jacques, please take care of the revert, this will keep the commit history cleaner. Thanks, Michael Am 21.09.16 um 14:04 schrieb Jacques Le Roux: I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) Jacques Le 21/09/2016

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

I'm not against reverting it, it's a moot point to me. Please help yourselves (Michael or Taher. Or maybe Christian? :D) Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 11:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future then we must take a decision to stop usin

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

I don't think the performance argument is solid here But the FormFieldTitle_ thing is questionnable, yes. Even if I must say I missed this point when I committed this in my haste to close OFBIZ-8110. I'm actually slightly for FormFieldTitle_s, though it's maybe blurring things a bit, really a mo

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

This is a moot point, ask Christian :) Jacques Le 21/09/2016 à 09:47, gil portenseigne a écrit : Hi Jacques, Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and F

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

So what is the point you're trying to make? Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:18 PM, gil portenseigne < gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote: > Yes i did express m

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Yes idid express myself bad :), it was not a point i wanted to insist on. Sorry for the distraction. Le 21/09/2016 à 12:16, Pierre Smits a écrit : No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required. Unl

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

No it doesn't. In fact it is completely off. Because the inclusion of the component name (MyComponent, in your reference) is nowhere required. Unless I am misunderstanding you. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Mark

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

In the commit for instance : title="${uiLabelMap.CommonDescription}" the MyComponent/Common explain both possible cases... Le 21/09/2016 à 11:52, Pierre Smits a écrit : HI Gil, Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" in widgets and templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

HI Gil, Where do you see "uiLabelMap.MyComponent/CommonX" in widgets and templates? Nowhere, as far as I can tell. But in each (most?) component you'll find {code} {code} And for what it is worth: a product in manufacturing, accounting, party, workeffort or any other component referencing a

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

I suggest also to revert. If we want to apply such a change in the future then we must take a decision to stop using convention-over-configuration for _all_ widget fields. And if we do not want to use that convention then we should remove the related code accordingly. On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:04

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Hi Gil, Am 21.09.16 um 11:25 schrieb gil portenseigne: Labels for products or others object could be different in each component, thus i don't like replacing all with CommonXXX I agree, this would be an unwanted regression. Regards, Michael smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Si

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Hi Pierre, I do not agree that FormFieldTitle_XXX is *only* for lazy programmer (and i remember a teacher that used to tell that to be good, you have to be smartly lazy :) ). The fact that this label contains default translation for XXX fields allow speed developpmentand is far more readable

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

I'd suggest to revert this commit. Thanks, Michael Am 21.09.16 um 09:47 schrieb gil portenseigne: Hi Jacques, Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

FormFieldTitle_XXX is for lazy programmers, only considering the OFBiz Demo implementation as the only adopter of the product. Who use {code}{code} as their means to display entity elements (fields) in forms. Unfortunately that doesn't work for all. Furthermore, like I said in https://issues.apac

Re: svn commit: r1761687 - /ofbiz/trunk/specialpurpose/myportal/widget/PortalAdmForms.xml

Hi Jacques, Like Nicolas said in previous Michael commit answer: http://markmail.org/message/x4ulworuwgbotvrv?q=r1761332 I do not understand these kindof improvements. Adding a title when and FormFieldTitle_XXX properties exists is not good in my opinion (i did not check these ones). Moreo