Hi Michael,
Okay, I didn't look at that page. Yes, it should be sufficient. Thanks.
Sincerely,
James
On 2017-05-08 16:54 (+0800), Michael Brohl wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> thanks for your suggestion. That's exactly what I did in [1], which pops
> up a warning.
>
>
Hi James,
thanks for your suggestion. That's exactly what I did in [1], which pops
up a warning.
Don't you think it is sufficient?
Best regards,
Michael
[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Mini+Language+-+minilang+-+simple-method+-+Reference
Am 08.05.17 um 05:34
Hi all,
Since this will be an on-going effort, it would be useful to post the links,
mentioned below, on the confluence header (together with the notice "Access to
add and change pages is restricted").
Will help to remind both user and developer groups using confluence.
Don't want to see new
Dear all,
just an update for this topic.
I have created a Jira issue to track the efforts. [1]
A first version of the corresponding wiki page to document the rationale
and next steps is now in Confluence. [2]
If you want to contribute, please drop me a line. Any help for the next
steps is
Thanks for the reference, Jacques.
Am 29.03.17 um 18:12 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
+1
For those interested, thanks to Jacopo, we have already a beginning of
a Groovy DSL
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Groovy+DSL+for+OFBiz+business+logic
Good idea, thanks Taher!
Cheers,
Michael
Am 29.03.17 um 19:47 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
+1
I recommend that you put somewhere in the wiki page the _reasons_ why
minilang is deprecated (the ones you listed in this thread).
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Michael Brohl
+1
I recommend that you put somewhere in the wiki page the _reasons_ why
minilang is deprecated (the ones you listed in this thread).
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Michael Brohl
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> thank you for your replies and comments to the proposal to
+1
For those interested, thanks to Jacopo, we have already a beginning of a Groovy
DSL
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Groovy+DSL+for+OFBiz+business+logic
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+Tutorial+-+A+Beginners+Development+Guide
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Michael Brohl
wrote:
> [...]
> I therefore like to propose to deprecate the mini lang implementation
> which means:
>
> 1. there will be no new implementations based on mini lang accepted to go
> into the code base.
>
> 2. mini lang and
Hi all,
thank you for your replies and comments to the proposal to deprecate
minilang in OFBiz.
We had mostly +1's, some questions and remarks and no -1's. It was not
an official vote but I think we can take these results as a confirmation
that the community wants to follow the proposal,
+1
Rishi Solanki
Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: +91-9893287847
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Julien NICOLAS
wrote:
> +1
>
>
>
> On 27/02/2017 13:44, Nicolas Malin wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> I also
+1
On 27/02/2017 13:44, Nicolas Malin wrote:
+1
I also agree to replace the minilang by groovy dsl for service.
For screen a prefer wait a good equivalent solution for simple case.
Nicolas
Le 18/02/2017 à 10:17, Michael Brohl a écrit :
Hi everyone,
we are currently working hard to make
+1
Thanks for the well thought proposal.
Best regards,
Pranay Pandey
HotWax Systems
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Michael Brohl
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust and
>
+1
I also agree to replace the minilang by groovy dsl for service.
For screen a prefer wait a good equivalent solution for simple case.
Nicolas
Le 18/02/2017 à 10:17, Michael Brohl a écrit :
Hi everyone,
we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust
and easy to use
+1
- Best Regards,
Swapnil M Mane
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Michael Brohl
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust and
> easy to use framework.
> There are several ongoing initiatives like refactoring the
+1.
-邮件原件-
发件人: Michael Brohl [mailto:michael.br...@ecomify.de]
发送时间: 2017年2月18日 17:17
收件人: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
主题: [PROPOSAL] deprecate mini lang
Hi everyone,
we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust
and easy to use framework.
There are several ongoing
+1
Thanks Michael for the proposal ! I've got nothing to add to your mail ;) !
Gil
On 18/02/2017 10:17, Michael Brohl wrote:
Hi everyone,
we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust
and easy to use framework.
There are several ongoing initiatives like refactoring
+1
Thank you Michael for the well thought proposal.
Jacopo
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Michael Brohl
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust and
> easy to use framework.
> There are several ongoing
.135035.n4.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-deprecate-mini-lang-tp4702545p4702632.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Pierre,
my proposal was to deprecate mini lang, not to drop xml based
definitions and configurations as a whole.
Regards,
Michael
Am 18.02.17 um 13:12 schrieb Pierre Smits:
I am inclined to say +1.
But I see some concerns rising (with respect to some suggestions) with new
additions,
at last resort. We have to think
about actions in widgets, but I see no problems with them for now.
3. No more ofbiz-component.xml, *Data.xml and *Label.xml? Into what do
we want these be refactored?
Why would that change? It's not "[PROPOSAL] deprecate XML" only [PROPOSAL]
I am inclined to say +1.
But I see some concerns rising (with respect to some suggestions) with new
additions, e.g:
1. No more simple (entity-auto) services, ecas and secas in xml? Or only
no more complex ones? Do we opt for Java, Groovy, or leave that to the
discretion of each
+1
I have wondered how hard it would be to create an isomorphic conversion
between minilang and a Groovy DSL - bidirectional conversion between the
two. That would mean we could automatically convert the existing minilang
to the DSL, and if there is anyone who prefers minilang, they could convert
I agree with both of you.
The recent FinAccount deadlock issue reported on dev ML is one example of the type of issues which would be easier to deal with with a Turing complete
language or at least a better DSL.
My 2 cts
Jacques
Le 18/02/2017 à 10:25, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
+1
let's
+1
let's maintain but not add more to the pile, and try to replace everything
written in minilang with other languages over time. I think your arguments
and proposal are well founded and would really improve the health of this
project.
On Feb 18, 2017 12:17 PM, "Michael Brohl"
Hi everyone,
we are currently working hard to make OFBiz a modern, quality, robust
and easy to use framework.
There are several ongoing initiatives like refactoring the core, UX,
changing the build and plugin system and cleaning up the javadocs, only
to mention a few.
In mini lang I see
26 matches
Mail list logo