ofbiz-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicolas Malin <nicolas.ma...@nereide.fr>
Subject Re: Deleting CommonsDaemonStart.java
Date Tue, 24 May 2016 19:34:26 GMT
Hi Taher,

I tried to understand and comment your patch, but my apologies it's too 
technical for me ! I'm sure on one point, if some other technical guys 
don't raise any alert, it's that you proposition goes on the good way ;)

If I can, I will try to test some configuration case.


Le 22/05/2016 09:59, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
> Hi Jacques, Jacopo and everyone,
> I have a big patch (about 1,500 lines) that among other things deletes CommonsDaemonStart
and fully refactors the Start component.
> I need help in checking this patch. The system seems to be running smoothly and all tests
pass on my computer. A few more eyeballs on this would help though.
> Thank you for your help!
> Taher Alkhateeb
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jacopo Cappellato [mailto:jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxsystems.com]
> Sent: 17 May 2016 10:54
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Deleting CommonsDaemonStart.java
> I second this approach as a general rule, if applied carefully and wisely (as it is in
this specific case).
> By removing incomplete code, the person working on the refactoring will have a simplified
system to work with in the refactoring; the removed code will always be available in the history
of the revision control system and the persons interested in completing the support of the
removed feature will have a chance to check the code out and refactor/complete it.
> Jacopo
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com>
>> Actually this is what I think too. Adam never completed the work and
>> it's useless as is. Maybe he has his own usage of it, but for a reason
>> did not contribute it.
>> Anyway, I see no problem removing it, it seems Adam and others are
>> also not concerned.
>> Jacques
>> Le 06/05/2016 à 12:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>>> Hi Jacque,
>>> I suspect that jsvc is half-cooked and is not really implemented. You
>>> can't find commons-daemon-*.jar anywhere in the code base. The only
>>> thing that exists is CommonsDaemonStart.java which is exposing
>>> Start.start(),
>>> Start.shutdownServer() and Start.init() and is not fully implemented
>>> (destroy() does nothing).
>>> My objective right now is not to implement jsvc (although a good
>>> idea) but to clean up the code. It is really nasty to expose
>>> Start.java by calling
>>> Start.getInstance().init(args) for example. So my suggestion is, if
>>> no one is actually using or depending on CommonsDaemonStart.java (I
>>> suspect no one is using it) then we are better off deleting it. This
>>> makes the refactoring of Start.java much better and actually allows
>>> for better implementation of jsvc in the future if needed.
>>> So my recommendation for better cleaner code is to simply delete
>>> CommonsDaemonStart.java due to poor code and my suspicion that it is
>>> not used. Otherwise, I'll have to try and refactor _around_ it. Not
>>> sure if we should vote on this, or wait for more feedback, or just drop it?
>>> Appreciate
>>> any feedback.
>>> Taher Alkhateeb
>>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
>>> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Taher,
>>>> Jsvc sounds like a good thing to have. So if you envision a better
>>>> to way to have it in OFBiz, please share in a new Jira with a ref to
>>>> 5710
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Jacques
>>>> Le 05/05/2016 à 17:59, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>>> So while trying to refactor Start.java, I see uglier code as I dig
>>>>> deeper.
>>>>> One of the annoying things I've seen so far is the introduction of
>>>>> jsvc through the class org.ofbiz.base.start.CommonsDaemonStart.
>>>>> The dependency from CommonsDaemonStart.java to Start.java is making
>>>>> the code ugly and exposed not to mention some other technical
>>>>> problems as discussed in
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5710
>>>>> I want to know whether the community is using this class and there
>>>>> is valuable use for it, or whether we can just delete it. I believe
>>>>> we can reintroduce jsvc in a much cleaner way in the future.
>>>>> Thank you in advance for your feedback.
>>>>> Taher Alkhateeb

View raw message