You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net> on 2006/06/23 21:05:22 UTC
Re: removing some code from the SVN
I would like to see both on additions, changes, removing, a comment left
in the code.
in your case a simple removed see such and such.
Also like to see a Jira with the deleted code so someone could uses it
if they wanted.
Si Chen sent the following on 6/23/06 12:07 PM:
> Hi. What should be our policy for removing code when we have a better
> implementation? We originally put some code in OrderServices for
> auto-exploding marketing packages, but now with Jacopo's new auto
> production run that code is no longer needed by us at least. I was
> also never fully satisfied with the code -- it caused all sorts of
> problems when there were fractions or adjustments, so I'd like to
> remove. Is that OK?
>
> Si
>
Re: removing some code from the SVN
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ti...@sastau.it>.
Si,
that code was causing a major issue: non-product order items were
excluded from the order; for this reason I've commented, in the
createOrder service the call to the autoExplode* method in rev 7860.
I think that now that code can be removed, could you have a look at it?
Thanks,
Jacopo
Si Chen wrote:
> Yeah, I think that's a good idea. Let me mark up some stuff. SVN r 7853.
>
>
> Si
>
>
> On Jun 23, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Vinay Agarwal wrote:
>
>> I think any code (or entity) intended for removal should be marked
>> "deprecated" for some period so that anyone using them have time to
>> change
>> their implementation. Subsequently, it should be simply removed.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vinay Agarwal
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com]
>> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 2:24 PM
>> To: ofbiz-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: removing some code from the SVN
>>
>> I agree with BJ
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>>> I would like to see both on additions, changes, removing, a comment
>>> left in the code.
>>> in your case a simple removed see such and such.
>>> Also like to see a Jira with the deleted code so someone could uses it
>>> if they wanted.
>>>
>>> Si Chen sent the following on 6/23/06 12:07 PM:
>>>> Hi. What should be our policy for removing code when we have a
>>>> better implementation? We originally put some code in OrderServices
>>>> for auto-exploding marketing packages, but now with Jacopo's new
>>>> auto production run that code is no longer needed by us at least. I
>>>> was also never fully satisfied with the code -- it caused all sorts
>>>> of problems when there were fractions or adjustments, so I'd like to
>>>> remove. Is that OK?
>>>>
>>>> Si
>>>>
>
>
Re: removing some code from the SVN
Posted by Si Chen <si...@opensourcestrategies.com>.
Yeah, I think that's a good idea. Let me mark up some stuff. SVN r
7853.
Si
On Jun 23, 2006, at 2:58 PM, Vinay Agarwal wrote:
> I think any code (or entity) intended for removal should be marked
> "deprecated" for some period so that anyone using them have time to
> change
> their implementation. Subsequently, it should be simply removed.
>
> Regards,
> Vinay Agarwal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 2:24 PM
> To: ofbiz-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: removing some code from the SVN
>
> I agree with BJ
>
> Jacques
>
>
>> I would like to see both on additions, changes, removing, a comment
>> left in the code.
>> in your case a simple removed see such and such.
>> Also like to see a Jira with the deleted code so someone could
>> uses it
>> if they wanted.
>>
>> Si Chen sent the following on 6/23/06 12:07 PM:
>>> Hi. What should be our policy for removing code when we have a
>>> better implementation? We originally put some code in OrderServices
>>> for auto-exploding marketing packages, but now with Jacopo's new
>>> auto production run that code is no longer needed by us at least. I
>>> was also never fully satisfied with the code -- it caused all sorts
>>> of problems when there were fractions or adjustments, so I'd like to
>>> remove. Is that OK?
>>>
>>> Si
>>>
RE: removing some code from the SVN
Posted by Vinay Agarwal <Vi...@hotmail.com>.
I think any code (or entity) intended for removal should be marked
"deprecated" for some period so that anyone using them have time to change
their implementation. Subsequently, it should be simply removed.
Regards,
Vinay Agarwal
-----Original Message-----
From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com]
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 2:24 PM
To: ofbiz-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: removing some code from the SVN
I agree with BJ
Jacques
> I would like to see both on additions, changes, removing, a comment
> left in the code.
> in your case a simple removed see such and such.
> Also like to see a Jira with the deleted code so someone could uses it
> if they wanted.
>
> Si Chen sent the following on 6/23/06 12:07 PM:
> > Hi. What should be our policy for removing code when we have a
> > better implementation? We originally put some code in OrderServices
> > for auto-exploding marketing packages, but now with Jacopo's new
> > auto production run that code is no longer needed by us at least. I
> > was also never fully satisfied with the code -- it caused all sorts
> > of problems when there were fractions or adjustments, so I'd like to
> > remove. Is that OK?
> >
> > Si
> >
Re: removing some code from the SVN
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
I agree with BJ
Jacques
> I would like to see both on additions, changes, removing, a comment left
> in the code.
> in your case a simple removed see such and such.
> Also like to see a Jira with the deleted code so someone could uses it
> if they wanted.
>
> Si Chen sent the following on 6/23/06 12:07 PM:
> > Hi. What should be our policy for removing code when we have a better
> > implementation? We originally put some code in OrderServices for
> > auto-exploding marketing packages, but now with Jacopo's new auto
> > production run that code is no longer needed by us at least. I was
> > also never fully satisfied with the code -- it caused all sorts of
> > problems when there were fractions or adjustments, so I'd like to
> > remove. Is that OK?
> >
> > Si
> >