On 14/06/2015 2:16 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Le 13/06/2015 14:12, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
a) I am not sure why applications/datamodel/entitidef/ could not be
entitydef / since it is shorter and unambiguous and spells entity
correctly.
Applications was suggested because there are underneath
Le 13/06/2015 14:12, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
a) I am not sure why applications/datamodel/entitidef/ could not be entitydef /
since it is shorter and unambiguous and spells entity correctly.
Applications was suggested because there are underneath mechanisms to handle the specialised folders
a) I am not sure why applications/datamodel/entitidef/ could not be
entitydef/ since it is shorter and unambiguous and spells entity correctly.
b) I thought that hot-deploy was for local customizations.
entitydef/... are user contributed libraries that are part of the
standard OFBiz project to
Are we still talking about entity definitions?
I would like to see where the universal data model misses elements
regarding any locale.
Best regards,
Pierre
On Saturday, June 13, 2015, Ron Wheeler rwhee...@artifact-software.com
wrote:
a) I am not sure why applications/datamodel/entitidef/
I don't agree that moving in this direction will convince our potential
adopters to chose OFBiz. Having all entities in one component doestn't give
them more choice. Neither does having all eecas in one component.
Today it is already possible to have the entity definitions split up into
multiple
Le 11/06/2015 16:18, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
On Jun 11, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Taher Alkhateeb slidingfilame...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to help and I think we need to think carefully of the layout /
structure though i.e. how to breakup the entities in files and/or directories.
I would
On Jun 12, 2015, at 8:45 AM, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't agree that moving in this direction will convince our potential
adopters to chose OFBiz. Having all entities in one component doestn't give
them more choice. Neither does having all eecas in one component.
Le 11/06/2015 21:10, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
I would suggest adding other levels to the structure so that specializations are easy to add without creating conflicts or constant flux as people
alter the accounting-entitymodel.xml to suit their needs and submit it as the right version.
I am not sure that restructuring the folder and separating the
definitions mean that we have to consolidate all accounting entities
into one file but separating code from data is the core of this idea.
Ron
On 12/06/2015 2:45 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
I don't agree that moving in this
... and not necessarily into
component names.
Taher Alkhateeb
- Original Message -
From: Ron Wheeler rwhee...@artifact-software.com
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 12 June, 2015 2:17:50 PM
Subject: Re: Move Application Entity Definitions to A Separate Component
It would be nice
It would be nice to get the philosophy of the structure agreed at the
beginning even if there is only one variant of accounting-entitymodel.xml .
It might prevent conflicts over the content of some of the files and
encourage more contributors who are confident about how their
definitions work
Le 11/06/2015 16:18, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
On Jun 11, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Taher Alkhateeb slidingfilame...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to help and I think we need to think carefully of the layout /
structure though i.e. how to breakup the entities in files and/or directories.
I would
Ron I didn't understand why you want adding specialization directory
directly on main component (like entitydef/general/UK/).
For me this information need to be set on the dedicate component in
hot-deploy.
Nicolas
Le 12/06/2015 13:17, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
It would be nice to get the
On Jun 11, 2015, at 3:51 PM, Taher Alkhateeb slidingfilame...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to help and I think we need to think carefully of the layout /
structure though i.e. how to breakup the entities in files and/or directories.
I would suggest that, at least in the first step, we do it
I would suggest adding other levels to the structure so that
specializations are easy to add without creating conflicts or constant
flux as people alter the accounting-entitymodel.xml to suit their needs
and submit it as the right version.
PM
Subject: Re: Move Application Entity Definitions to A Separate Component
+1
Would like to see the definitions organized in a way that makes it easy
to see what entities are mandatory as is as opposed to customizable.
Might also want to consider having multiple variations of the entities
for our
Community Day next week?
Thanks
Sharan
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Move-Application-Entity-Definitions-to-A-Separate-Component-tp4669903.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact
-Application-Entity-Definitions-to-A-Separate-Component-tp4669903.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
18 matches
Mail list logo
