ofbiz-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pawan Verma <pawan.ve...@hotwaxsystems.com>
Subject Re: Services with no definition and usage
Date Sat, 16 Sep 2017 17:31:33 GMT
Thanks Jacques for logging Jira for this.

I have completed this effort and attached a patch on the Jira. Please have
a look.

--
Thanks and Regards,

*Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by HotWax Systems
<http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant Convention Center, Indore,
M.P, India - 452010
Cell phone: +91 9977705687

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:

> Yes! thanks Rishi
>
> Jacques
>
>
>
> Le 12/09/2017 à 10:16, Rishi Solanki a écrit :
>
>> +1 Jacques, Scott, we should keep the mentioned services and enable them
>> by
>> adding the service definition. Similar services already in system for
>> party, facility, order, with contact mech (postal address/telecom number)
>> creation. The code is simply created the work effort with postal
>> address/telecom number, which seems to be genetic use case for
>> intersection
>> relations.
>>
>> Rishi Solanki
>> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
>> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
>> Direct: +91-9893287847
>> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
>> www.hotwax.co
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Scott Gray <scott.gray@hotwaxsystems.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm in favor of keeping them and adding the service definitions.  As Taher
>>> mentions, these are CRUD services and IMO if we have the table, we should
>>> have the set of services allowing management of the data.
>>>
>>> These implementations are quite synonymous with the FacilityContactMech
>>> services, they're only gathering dust because we don't have very advanced
>>> work effort management screens and in cases where we do, the work effort
>>> is
>>> usually bound to a facility where the work will take place so the contact
>>> mechs from the facility are used.
>>>
>>> The moment somebody wants to start doing some event management with
>>> OFBiz,
>>> these services would become useful.  What we have here is a gap in the
>>> work
>>> effort management screens, not a code bloat problem.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> On 11 September 2017 at 00:15, Jacques Le Roux <
>>> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Here, it's not about Minilang but only service definitions
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le 10/09/2017 à 13:23, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> I think if we have code which is not used or planned to be used, it
>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since we agreed on deprecating minilang, no code is allowed to be
>>>>> commited using minilang with the exception of a bug fix. We shoul be
>>>>>
>>>> very
>>>
>>>> restrictive in this case.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that we should first provide a test or convert a mini lang test
>>>>> and provide it along with the converted code. This will be an
>>>>>
>>>> imporvement
>>>
>>>> on the test coverage and also prove that the converted code works the
>>>>>
>>>> same
>>>
>>>> as the minilang version.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 01.09.17 um 11:34 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>>>
>>>>> There will be years before we rewrite all the Minilang services. It's
>>>>>> just an hour to revive these services, I can do it
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It will then be easy to rewrite them with all the others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW I fear this moment of massive regressions if we don't put ALL
the
>>>>>> required tests before doing the rewriting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 01/09/2017 à 11:23, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well .. according to you, the thoughts were put in these services
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> before
>>>
>>>> the apache era! I'm not sure if we want such _very_ old code revived.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I
>>>
>>>> also think the community is capable enough of rewriting basic CRUD
>>>>>>> services. There is no magic or incredibly sophisticated algorithms
in
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> code. Juat another CRUD.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2017 12:16 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" <
>>>>>>> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I disagree, some thoughts were put in these services. They are
in
>>>>>>> Minilang
>>>>>>> admittedly, but we can still keep them and transform them later
and
>>>>>>> anway
>>>>>>> we have tons of Minilang services.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure if I found them all but they seem to start from
>>>>>>> updateWorkEffortContactMech and end at updateWorkEffortEmailAddress.
>>>>>>> They
>>>>>>> all use updateWorkEffortContactMech which is only used by them
and
>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>> no definition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's 168 lines of Minilang
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 01/09/2017 à 10:47, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree, we need to remove from the pile not add to it. Deleting
is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> best course of action IMHO. Heck even some of the defined services
>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>> be deleted or heavily refactored for that matter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 2017 11:33 AM, "Pierre Smits" <pierre.smits@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the services are not used, we should ask ourselves whether
it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> would
>>>
>>>> not
>>>>>>>> be best to remove these to keep the code base clean. If need
be
>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> always be brought back from the repo.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
>>>>>>>> OFBiz based solutions & services
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OEM: the unaffiliated OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
>>>>>>>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
>>>>>>>> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Pawan,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> These services implementations were created before the Apache
era.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suggest we simply create the corresponding definitions
and test
>>>>>>>>> they are
>>>>>>>>> OK
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Le 31/08/2017 à 19:38, Pawan Verma a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Devs,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just walked through from *WorkEffortSimpleServices.xml*
and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> noticed
>>>
>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> some of the simple methods neither have any service definition
nor
>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> anywhere. Some of the examples are createWorkEffortPostalAddress,
>>>>>>>>>> createWorkEffortTelecomNumber
>>>>>>>>>> etc. I was expecting that it must be there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So I was just curious to know why it was not there,
was it
>>>>>>>>>> intentional?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> it will be done under the Minilang deprecation task going
on?
>>>>>>>>> Please
>>>>>>>>> let
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>> know if anyone has any information on it else I would
be more than
>>>>>>>>>> happy
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> provide a patch to get it fixed now.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Pawan Verma* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>>> HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/> by
HotWax Systems
>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
>>>>>>>>>> Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78 Part ||, Near Brilliant
Convention
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Center,
>>>
>>>> Indore,
>>>>>>>>>> M.P, India - 452010
>>>>>>>>>> Cell phone: +91 9977705687
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message