plugin and hotdeploy

[Wai <bz...@gmail.com>]

Now that the plugin is in place for ofbiz.  Is there a difference between
hotdeploy components and that of plugins components?
Thanks



--
View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Mike <mz...@gmail.com>]

> Software documentation is always written for a target version of a
software
> product and most of the users understand and accept that some of the
> information in an older book may not be applicable to newer versions of
the
> software.

That is not the point.  Far as I can tell, there is no reason why you
couldn't keep a "functioning" hot-deploy directory and still encourage
folks to migrate to plugins.  Still, there are a lot of people and
companies that are NOT running the bleeding edge version of ofbiz, and have
no immediate plans to migrate and convert.  They have employees and
training systems, which obviously use and refer to previously written books
and wikis.

This is my point.  Do no harm.  Keep things backward compatible as much as
possible.  There are more users than dev folks.

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Mike <mz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [...] All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
> > guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been
> completely
> > wiped out [...]
>
>
> Software documentation is always written for a target version of a software
> product and most of the users understand and accept that some of the
> information in an older book may not be applicable to newer versions of the
> software.
>
> Jacopo
>

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>]

Hi Rishi,

That's quite a good idea and good news.  IIRW, there is already a start for such things, right?

BTW, I think we should use as much as possible the Confluence history to avoid to duplicate things and have to maintain them.

My 2cts

Jacques


Le 24/04/2017 � 12:26, Rishi Solanki a �crit :
> How about if we start reviewing the documents and update them something
> like for which versions those documents applicable. Or may be overall
> rearrangement of docs by version.
>
> If we go for overall rearrangement by version then we may have redundant
> documentation in most cases. So I would suggest to add supporting version
> in the title, or on the top of doc or bottom. May be we can discuss and
> come with some best practice to maintain the version.
>
> After that whenever we work on any document we would maintain the practice,
> which includes text, image, video, audio all documents. If community agree
> then I would like to start on this and start updating few most frequently
> used docs.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> Rishi Solanki
> Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
> HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
> Direct: +91-9893287847
> http://www.hotwaxsystems.com
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Jacopo Cappellato <
> jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Mike <mz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> [...] All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
>>> guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been
>> completely
>>> wiped out [...]
>>
>> Software documentation is always written for a target version of a software
>> product and most of the users understand and accept that some of the
>> information in an older book may not be applicable to newer versions of the
>> software.
>>
>> Jacopo
>>

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Rishi Solanki <ri...@gmail.com>]

How about if we start reviewing the documents and update them something
like for which versions those documents applicable. Or may be overall
rearrangement of docs by version.

If we go for overall rearrangement by version then we may have redundant
documentation in most cases. So I would suggest to add supporting version
in the title, or on the top of doc or bottom. May be we can discuss and
come with some best practice to maintain the version.

After that whenever we work on any document we would maintain the practice,
which includes text, image, video, audio all documents. If community agree
then I would like to start on this and start updating few most frequently
used docs.

Thanks!


Rishi Solanki
Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Direct: +91-9893287847
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Jacopo Cappellato <
jacopo.cappellato@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Mike <mz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [...] All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
> > guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been
> completely
> > wiped out [...]
>
>
> Software documentation is always written for a target version of a software
> product and most of the users understand and accept that some of the
> information in an older book may not be applicable to newer versions of the
> software.
>
> Jacopo
>

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxsystems.com>]

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Mike <mz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> [...] All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
> guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been completely
> wiped out [...]


Software documentation is always written for a target version of a software
product and most of the users understand and accept that some of the
information in an older book may not be applicable to newer versions of the
software.

Jacopo

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>]

Hi Mike,

Thank you for your feedback and raising your concerns. Perhaps the word
"useless" might not have been the best choice in the commit log. I would
maybe use the word redundant instead.

I would suggest that perhaps it is a rather minor thing to realize that
everything is the same but under /plugins instead of /hot-deploy. So maybe
this is not a big change that would take anyone hours or days to figure out
:) It's just a different directory name for consistency's sake.

Regarding discussions, I would like to highlight that this topic came about
multiple times in multiple threads and there was consensus to proceed in
order to unify how OFBiz is extended in addition to other benefits. Just
search JIRAs and the ML for discussions on plugins and hot-deploy to get an
idea. And by the way, this stuff is not left undocumented. Take a look at
README.md and it will explain to you how to create and manage plugins in a
good amount of detail.

With respect to existing documentation, may I suggest that it is simply
outdated and requires update? Books, wikis, blogs and even code gets
outdated eventually and hence everything should be revised and updated. If
you stop changing code just because there is material out there then you
cannot improve anything! I would suggest that this is a good opportunity
for book authors to update their material and publish new books.

Finally, there were massive changes in OFBiz over the past year or two far
beyond just hot-deploy. Examples? Gradle, Unit-Tests, Plugin Manager,
Remote Libraries, Deprecated Components, Deprecated Minilang, rename domain
to org.apache.ofbiz, and many more! All of this material needs to go into
new books and publications.

Cheers,

Taher Alkhateeb

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Mike <mz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just saw this: "Removes the now useless hot-deploy directory"
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9268
>
> Useless?  All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
> guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been completely
> wiped out by 2-3 folks on a short email discussion?
>
> Sorry, baffled.
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Wai <bz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've added a new thread in the dev list for more discussion
> > http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/discussion-With-plugins-
> > is-hot-deploy-necessary-td4702976.html
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> > com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922p4702977.html
> > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Pranay Pandey <pr...@hotwaxsystems.com>]

Good discussion for sure.

IMO, no one would like to use Trunk for an ongoing development of custom
apps. Choosing an official release helps here.

OFBiz is going through a major phase of improvements and all of these are
being done only in trunk, which is perfectly fine.

If you are subscribed to OFBiz Wiki(Confluence) Daily Updates, you will
observe there are ongoing changes to the documentation being taken care of.

I agree that there will be some effort required to keep it up to date and
to make it ready for future releases.

We should define a documentation framework as well, that can be maintained
along with the code in trunk, which is available to users when a specific
release is announced.

When one application is to upgraded to any of the latest releases of OFBiz,
there are definitely a bunch of changes you have to take care of, this time
it would require some changes to the placement of custom applications,
which is not going to be a big effort.

In the software world, making a small change is a big deal when it has many
users, but sometimes you have to take the risks because it's going to
benefit users in future. I personally have witnessed long email threads on
dev list before making these changes in directory structures or replacement
of tools like from ant to gradle.

So yes IMHO, change is always not that easy.


Best regards,

Pranay Pandey
Senior Manager, Enterprise Software Development
HotWax Systems
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
slidingfilaments@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Skip,
>
> If you check trunk, you will notice that hot-deploy is removed and
> specialpurpose is renamed to plugins and it is _empty_
>
> On Apr 24, 2017 9:41 PM, "Skip" <sk...@thedevers.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > james yong wrote "The special-purpose and hot-deploy folders are
> > essentially
> > combined into a
> > plugins folder which is easier understood by new users, in my own
> opinion."
> >
> > I disagree strongly with this statement.  Historically, special-purpose
> was
> > just that, components which are not generally used by most users.
> > hot-deploy is (was) used by nearly everyone to put custom components used
> > by
> > their application.
> >
> > Having a single plugin folder that combines both hot-deploy and
> > special-purpose seems to me to be a very bad idea.  Why not just rename
> > hot-deploy to plugin and leave special-purpose as it is.  Makes directory
> > management much easier to not have the 20 odd components in
> special-purpose
> > combined with the few in hot-deploy.
> >
> >
> > Skip
> >
> >
> >
>

RE: plugin and hotdeploy

[Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>]

Hi Skip,

If you check trunk, you will notice that hot-deploy is removed and
specialpurpose is renamed to plugins and it is _empty_

On Apr 24, 2017 9:41 PM, "Skip" <sk...@thedevers.org> wrote:

>
> james yong wrote "The special-purpose and hot-deploy folders are
> essentially
> combined into a
> plugins folder which is easier understood by new users, in my own opinion."
>
> I disagree strongly with this statement.  Historically, special-purpose was
> just that, components which are not generally used by most users.
> hot-deploy is (was) used by nearly everyone to put custom components used
> by
> their application.
>
> Having a single plugin folder that combines both hot-deploy and
> special-purpose seems to me to be a very bad idea.  Why not just rename
> hot-deploy to plugin and leave special-purpose as it is.  Makes directory
> management much easier to not have the 20 odd components in special-purpose
> combined with the few in hot-deploy.
>
>
> Skip
>
>
>

RE: plugin and hotdeploy

[Skip <sk...@thedevers.org>]

james yong wrote "The special-purpose and hot-deploy folders are essentially
combined into a
plugins folder which is easier understood by new users, in my own opinion."

I disagree strongly with this statement.  Historically, special-purpose was
just that, components which are not generally used by most users.
hot-deploy is (was) used by nearly everyone to put custom components used by
their application.

Having a single plugin folder that combines both hot-deploy and
special-purpose seems to me to be a very bad idea.  Why not just rename
hot-deploy to plugin and leave special-purpose as it is.  Makes directory
management much easier to not have the 20 odd components in special-purpose
combined with the few in hot-deploy.


Skip

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[james yong <i_...@yahoo.com.sg>]

Not sure if hot-deploy folder is also removed in release 16.11. 
We can update confluence with a notice on the change, in each affected wiki
page.
Similar to what was done when Gradle is introduced in release 16.11 and
onwards.

The special-purpose and hot-deploy folders are essentially combined into a
plugins folder which is easier understood by new users, in my own opinion.

Regards,
James Yong


Mike Z wrote
> Just saw this: "Removes the now useless hot-deploy directory"
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9268
> 
> Useless?  All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
> guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been completely
> wiped out by 2-3 folks on a short email discussion?
> 
> Sorry, baffled.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Wai <

> bzb.ofbiz@

> > wrote:
> 
>> I've added a new thread in the dev list for more discussion
>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/discussion-With-plugins-
>> is-hot-deploy-necessary-td4702976.html
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
>> com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922p4702977.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>





--
View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922p4705145.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Mike <mz...@gmail.com>]

Just saw this: "Removes the now useless hot-deploy directory"

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9268

Useless?  All the previous books, emails, articles, wikis, and blogs that
guided folks on how to deploy a new app, or modify one has been completely
wiped out by 2-3 folks on a short email discussion?

Sorry, baffled.

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Wai <bz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've added a new thread in the dev list for more discussion
> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/discussion-With-plugins-
> is-hot-deploy-necessary-td4702976.html
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922p4702977.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Wai <bz...@gmail.com>]

I've added a new thread in the dev list for more discussion
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/discussion-With-plugins-is-hot-deploy-necessary-td4702976.html



--
View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922p4702977.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: plugin and hotdeploy

[Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>]

Are you referring to "Trunk"? If yes, then no there is no difference. We
will start discussing this in dev@

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Wai <bz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Now that the plugin is in place for ofbiz.  Is there a difference between
> hotdeploy components and that of plugins components?
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-tp4702922.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>