Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

We have lazy consensus and vote for that. But after them we still need action. I keep note about things I want to do. Sometimes it happens years after, and I have also seen others doing things I waited for years. It warms my heart then :) Just an human Jacques Le 27/01/2018 à 16:00, Pierre

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

> I noticed discussions not followed by action (at least Jiras creation, or > even closing) are useless as they almost sublimate in the void. > > Jacques > > How unfortunate. But when each comment added inserts a (new) viewpoint about other aspects of the code base, then it is very hard for each

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Le 08/01/2018 à 19:14, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : - commonext: that's a difficult one, lots of entanglements, but none the less I'm not sure why does it exist and why does it depend on other "application" components. While looking to close old Jiras I stumbled upon

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Yes also, it's all about documenting IMO, either inside the component (my preference, either merged with example - not my preference again no not mix things, outside only (not my preference, blur things, using inside doc outside is OK IMO) or even w/o (which even less my preference) We have a

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Hi all, IMO, it may be better to improve upon ExampleExt to show how to extend/override the entities, services, screens, forms, events from Example component. This will help developers to implement OFBiz solutions correctly and make future upgrades possible. Regards, James Yong On

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Hi Taher, All, Scott made another good point on party for the reason of the existence of securityext I'll try to summarise where we are so far: * Both entityext and securityext have intrinsic value. They could be improved but a priori not removed and then specific Jiras should be created.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Certainly an ambitious but interesting idea Le 08/01/2018 à 11:29, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : Scott is making a good point about entity-ext: in my opinion the design is good (but can be improved). I suspect that commonext and exampleext have a less clean implementation and maybe they do not

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

That makes sense, thanks Scott Jacques Le 08/01/2018 à 19:51, Scott Gray a écrit : My memory is vague on security-ext but I think the purpose was to extend the security component for application-level functionality (as opposed to framework-level). For example the UserLogin.partyId field was

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

My memory is vague on security-ext but I think the purpose was to extend the security component for application-level functionality (as opposed to framework-level). For example the UserLogin.partyId field was added to the schema in this component because the framework wasn't supposed to have any

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

I stand corrected, Scott made a very good point regarding entityext that I did not pay enough attention to. Perhaps the name is misleading though, entityext means an enhancement or extension of the capabilities of the entity component which does not make a lot of sense. If it was called

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Scott is making a good point about entity-ext: in my opinion the design is good (but can be improved). I suspect that commonext and exampleext have a less clean implementation and maybe they do not even implement that pattern, I see less value in them. One comment on entity-ext: In my opinion we

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

I'm not against strictly against removing exampleext (maybe merging some part in example ). But then what it not clearly tries to explain (misc. extension mechanisms) should be clearly documented! For commonext I need to look at it again but at 1st glance it seems redundant indeed and could be

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

I'm not familiar with commonext or exampleext, but the purpose of the entity-ext component was to allow the entity engine to exist without the service engine. That's why all the entity-related logic that relies on the service engine is implemented there (EECAs, EntitySync, DCC). The alternative

Re: [DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

I think all -ext components (entityext, commonext, exampleext) are redundant and do not add value. Any patches to fix this issue and merge these components would be great. On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: > Hi all, > > The ExampleExt components

[DISCUSSION] Disentanglement of the ExampleExt component

Hi all, The ExampleExt components provides functionality to extend widgets across components. In this solution, the ExampleExt component has form widgets extending similar widgets in the Example component. This kind of functionality (both within one component and across, and with more variants)