ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com>
Subject Re: Difference between "id" and "id-ne" field type
Date Thu, 04 May 2017 00:09:44 GMT
Took a while to dig it out but here it is:
http://ofbiz.markmail.org/thread/c6ee3ewyo6jpik7k

It's not as in-depth as I'd hoped, but it was purposefully removed all the
same.

Regards
Scott

On 3 May 2017 at 17:42, Aditya Sharma <aditya.sharma@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:

> Hi Scott,
>
> As there is very less information available with the commit I found it
> quite difficult to find that discussion. Maybe I just missed out something.
> Could you please just help me trace that out to understand it well?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Aditya Sharma
> Enterprise Software Engineer
> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/
>
>       <https://www.linkedin.com/in/aditya-sharma-78291810a/>
>
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Aditya Sharma <
> aditya.sharma@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Taher,
> >
> > Totally agreed to that it should be at entity engine level and default to
> > false as that way it will not affect the current implementations and will
> > give more scope for its enhancements to cater specific needs.
> >
> > > My recommendation is to reintroduce the validation attribute. However!
> > the
> > > validation IMO should happen at the entity engine level, not the
> database
> > > level (for not null), and also the default value should be false if
> > > omitted. We also need to think of the design in respect of the
> validation
> > > attributes and how they apply.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Aditya Sharma
> > Enterprise Software Engineer
> > HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> > http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/
> >
> >       <https://www.linkedin.com/in/aditya-sharma-78291810a/>
> >
> > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Scott Gray <
> scott.gray@hotwaxsystems.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> It was removed purposefully and there was a discussion about it. I'd
> >> suggest we all need to go back and look at that discussion before
> deciding
> >> how to proceed.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Scott
> >>
> >> On 1/05/2017 19:03, "Taher Alkhateeb" <slidingfilaments@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I don't have the historical context, so please excuse if I'm off.
> >> >
> >> > My recommendation is to reintroduce the validation attribute. However!
> >> the
> >> > validation IMO should happen at the entity engine level, not the
> >> database
> >> > level (for not null), and also the default value should be false if
> >> > omitted. We also need to think of the design in respect of the
> >> validation
> >> > attributes and how they apply.
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Aditya Sharma <
> >> > aditya.sharma@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > While creating an entity I was in ambiguity whether to go for "*id*"
> >> or "
> >> > > *id-ne*" field type. When I googled it I came across this very
> >> enriching
> >> > > discussion.
> >> > >
> >> > > http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/EntityEngine-field-types-
> >> > td2251546.html
> >> > >
> >> > > As stated, an "id-ne" field can only have a *non-empty* value.
> >> > >
> >> > > I was very curious to know how it is implemented in OFBiz. I found
> >> that
> >> > > almost all the *fieldtype*.xml* files have *same* *sql-type* and
> >> > > *java-type*
> >> > > for these 2 field types but I couldn't get any trace of how that
> >> > not-empty
> >> > > constraint is levied upon "id-ne" fields.
> >> > >
> >> > > I even looked at table structure for those fields having "id-ne"
> field
> >> > type
> >> > > but there was no "not-null" constraint at even the database level.
> >> > >
> >> > > When dug into it further I can across this commit where validate
> >> elements
> >> > > were removed from fieldtype*.xml files.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > http://markmail.org/message/otec62xiwkpjttkq
> >> > >
> >> > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=959708
> >> > >
> >> > > But I can't get why it was removed and when it was removed whether
> >> there
> >> > > was some implementation that took its place for those validations.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > To further check if it even works I found an OOTB entity having a
> >> > > non-primary key "id-ne" field. I found that "*Picklist*" entity has
> a
> >> > field
> >> > > *shipmentMethodTypeId* as "id- ne" type. When we *create a picklist*
> >> for
> >> > an
> >> > > order from Facility Manager, *shipmentMethodTypeId* can be *empty*.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > If my explorations are correct currently there is no difference
> >> between
> >> > > "id" and "id-ne" at the implementation level and there should be a
> >> Jira
> >> > for
> >> > > it.
> >> > >
> >> > > If I missed out something, can someone please enlighten me with that
> >> and
> >> > > help me understanding it well.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > Aditya Sharma
> >> > > Enterprise Software Engineer
> >> > > HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> >> > > http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/
> >> > >
> >> > >       <https://www.linkedin.com/in/aditya-sharma-78291810a/>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

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