On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Roger L. Whitcomb <[email protected]> wrote: >> Depending on the node-state, the menu might even be dynamic. But cases where >> the node needs to be completely disabled it's just easier if the base >> library handled that. That way we can also avoid replicating that code in >> every user's application. > > Got it. That's why I suggested filing a JIRA issue for an improvement. > Thanks for that. > > Just curious -- what is your reason for writing 100% Java code? Our > application uses ~100 bxml files and many are dynamically chosen. We found > it easier to write even little bxml files for stuff rather than use Java code > (if possible), although there is a bunch of pure Java code in some cases too. > So, I was wondering what got you to the point of wanting only Java code? >
Just filed it(Pivot-867). The application that I'm targeting is similar to IPMI remote login but a more complex version. Depending on the state of the host/hardware we might have to juggle different fields. So it's best to handle that in code rather than writing several different bxmls. Also what if someone tampers the bxml? >>100% pivot-code will also jump start developers relatively quickly and might >>trigger adoption at a higher rate. > > Agreed, which is why I was wondering about your use case to consider how many > others might be in the same place. > > Thanks, > ~Roger > thanks
