You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com> on 2010/01/25 19:28:32 UTC
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
hansbak@apache.org wrote:
> Author: hansbak
> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
> New Revision: 902716
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
> Log:
>
> function leave feedback and screen
> - function auto relist item and screen
> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
> - help screens are provided
this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
it easier to verify and debug.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
David E Jones wrote:
> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>
> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
I agree with you, David.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
I can't disagree. It's good to see more things in OFBiz, having them in a better state should certainly be researched. I'm confident
in Hans to tackle this with time, we have already seen clear progresses.
But please Hans, even if it's the same work for review, break these big patches in smaller pieces. If we need to revert something it
will be much easier, thanks.
My 2cts
Jacques
From: "Tim Ruppert" <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>
Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as
"I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the
committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as
committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the
person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other
committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not
the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to
do what is clearly in our best practices.
What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and
sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
Cheers,
Ruppert
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>
> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>
> -David
>
>
> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and
>> something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've
>> received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>> --
>> Tim Ruppert
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> o:801.649.6594
>> f:801.649.6595
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>>
>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> hans
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>
>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>> Log:
>>>>>
>>>>> function leave feedback and screen
>>>>> - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>
>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>> --
>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>
> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices.
>
> What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
Reverting the commit is wrong. Just try to be more careful in the future.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Erwan de FERRIERES <er...@nereide.biz>.
Le 26/01/2010 15:28, Tim Ruppert a écrit :
> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>
> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices.
>
> What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
> --
> Tim Ruppert
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> o:801.649.6594
> f:801.649.6595
>
The problem we have here, is that a too big commit is not well reviewed.
From what I saw, and what has been reverted, it seems that a lot of
lines have not been validated.
We found (at Nereide) already one service going from https to http, and
the other thing is a suppression of all the shipment methods from the
demo data.
As we are all on different timezones, the responses and explanations are
a bit slow, and we cannot understand the reason of those changes.
I'm sure that smaller commits will help us understand the work done, and
the reason of the changes, and also point easily the reason of it.
This were my 2 cents....
--
Erwan de FERRIERES
www.nereide.biz
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
David E Jones wrote:
> Thanks Jacopo this makes a good distinction.
>
> We need peer review, and LOTS of it. We can't "wait" for code to improve because code doesn't just automatically improve over time, someone has to improve it and specific feedback on code itself will help with that.
>
> I don't see any reason to talk about the people or guesses about the behavior that caused code problems (which is silly, how do you know?).
>
> I'd argue that much of the feedback to Hans has not been specific or focused on the code, but rather either personal things or guesses at behavior behind the code or general trends that are of limited usefulness when it comes to improving the code. What's the point of any of that?
I haven't done any of this last paragraph. In fact, when I generally
reply to a commit mail, I tend to have blinders on, as to who actually
did it, what their background is, where they are located, what
timezone, etc.
If I suddenly start remembing who did what, then it might make me
start writing emails in a more personal matter, which then could be
misinterpeted, since we all have different backgrounds. It's much
better to look at *just the code*; it's much harder to argue against
that for argumentative sake.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
Adrian,
You have a gift for accuracy, generosity, and refreshingly bias-free analysis.
-David
On Jan 26, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> For those of you who didn't bother to read the entire thread, the comments in it were specific:
>
> 1. Hans made a large commit
> 2. Adam criticized the commit, asked Hans to break it up into smaller pieces
> 3. Hans blamed one of his workers
> 4. Tim commented that Hans has an obligation to make good commits
> 5. David accused Tim of picking a fight
> 6. Tim responded to David's accusation
> 7. I supported Tim, saying Hans' reputation has earned him additional scrutiny
>
> I understand David and Jacopo are trying to be diplomatic, but in this particular case it is counter-productive. Sometimes you just have to call a spade a spade.
>
> I would go into more detail about why I said what I did about Hans, but right now I'm too busy fixing the code he broke.
>
> -Adrian
>
> David E Jones wrote:
>> Thanks Jacopo this makes a good distinction.
>> We need peer review, and LOTS of it. We can't "wait" for code to improve because code doesn't just automatically improve over time, someone has to improve it and specific feedback on code itself will help with that.
>> I don't see any reason to talk about the people or guesses about the behavior that caused code problems (which is silly, how do you know?).
>> I'd argue that much of the feedback to Hans has not been specific or focused on the code, but rather either personal things or guesses at behavior behind the code or general trends that are of limited usefulness when it comes to improving the code. What's the point of any of that?
>> -David
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>> I understand the concerns and remarks but please, let's try to stay focused on specific details (that needs to be fixed): only in this way the conversation will be useful and we will help each other to get better code.
>>> If instead we make general assumptions on other's work (like defining the effort of a committer "a mess" or the effort of a "beginner programmer") we will just end up with people being offended and defensive.
>>>
>>> "make code not war" :-)
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tim,
>>>>
>>>> I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you. It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
>>>>
>>>> If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have had a detrimental effect on the project.
>>>>
>>>> Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You have my support.
>>>>
>>>> -Adrian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>>>>> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices. What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>>>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> hans
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Adrian Crum wrote:
> Adam Heath wrote:
>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>> For those of you who didn't bother to read the entire thread, the
>>> comments in it were specific:
>>>
>>> 1. Hans made a large commit
>>> 2. Adam criticized the commit, asked Hans to break it up into smaller
>>> pieces
>>> 3. Hans blamed one of his workers
>>> 4. Tim commented that Hans has an obligation to make good commits
>>> 5. David accused Tim of picking a fight
>>> 6. Tim responded to David's accusation
>>> 7. I supported Tim, saying Hans' reputation has earned him additional
>>> scrutiny
>>
>> Except that in step 4, Tim mentioned Hans; if he had removed that
>> single word, I would have sided(I hate that term in this situation)
>> with Tim.
>>
>> Yes, is a very small change. But if you re-read my mail, I didn't
>> mention any particular person. I just used generic pronouns. I do
>> that, so my explanations can be applied to *anyone*, as we *all* must
>> follow these rules.
>>
>> When a lone person is singled out, it is taken to mean that the rules
>> or discussion only apply to the target, instead of all.
>
> Very good advice. I will strive to be less personal in the future.
For reference, I've been involved in *extremely* *very* *heated*
*fireball* *flame* *total* *destruction* email *wars*. I've been
involved with debian for a long time(not so much lately); debian is
famous for it's, shall we say, email discussions.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>.
Adam Heath wrote:
> Adrian Crum wrote:
>> For those of you who didn't bother to read the entire thread, the
>> comments in it were specific:
>>
>> 1. Hans made a large commit
>> 2. Adam criticized the commit, asked Hans to break it up into smaller
>> pieces
>> 3. Hans blamed one of his workers
>> 4. Tim commented that Hans has an obligation to make good commits
>> 5. David accused Tim of picking a fight
>> 6. Tim responded to David's accusation
>> 7. I supported Tim, saying Hans' reputation has earned him additional
>> scrutiny
>
> Except that in step 4, Tim mentioned Hans; if he had removed that
> single word, I would have sided(I hate that term in this situation)
> with Tim.
>
> Yes, is a very small change. But if you re-read my mail, I didn't
> mention any particular person. I just used generic pronouns. I do
> that, so my explanations can be applied to *anyone*, as we *all* must
> follow these rules.
>
> When a lone person is singled out, it is taken to mean that the rules
> or discussion only apply to the target, instead of all.
Very good advice. I will strive to be less personal in the future.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "Adam Heath" <do...@brainfood.com>
> Adam Heath wrote:
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't
>>> remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>
> Granted, the thing I am pointing out was quoted from me, but I wasn't
> the one who put it into that page.
Yes I added them, I often follow your advices about reviewing (and others as well) because I know you have this Debian experience.
Jacques
> This same page says to do no harm. How is it possible to ensure that
> you do no harm, if you are committing 10 different things all at once?
> Maybe you(any you, not just you David) can handle super huge commits.
> But what about in the future, 6 or 18 months down the road, when you
> have moved on to other things. Are you saying you can go back to any
> point in time, and immediately understand what you were doing at the time?
>
> Now, consider some other person, who is *not* you, who is a completely
> different background, was raised in a different society, has different
> preconceptions, not to mention different desired features. Will this
> supposed person be able to look at this large set of changes, all
> combined, and be able to understand it?
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Adam Heath wrote:
> David E Jones wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>
>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
Granted, the thing I am pointing out was quoted from me, but I wasn't
the one who put it into that page.
This same page says to do no harm. How is it possible to ensure that
you do no harm, if you are committing 10 different things all at once?
Maybe you(any you, not just you David) can handle super huge commits.
But what about in the future, 6 or 18 months down the road, when you
have moved on to other things. Are you saying you can go back to any
point in time, and immediately understand what you were doing at the time?
Now, consider some other person, who is *not* you, who is a completely
different background, was raised in a different society, has different
preconceptions, not to mention different desired features. Will this
supposed person be able to look at this large set of changes, all
combined, and be able to understand it?
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "David E Jones" <de...@me.com>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> From: "David E Jones" <de...@me.com>
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>
>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't
>>>>> remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>>>
>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>>>
>>> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>>>
>>> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by
>>> Jacques?) from an email of yours
>>>
>>> -David
>>
>>
>> BTW, it's a bit out of subject but I asked recently if we should stll maintain
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz, because if I recall well lately it was not done,
>> but nobody answered to my question.
>> So here it is again :o) should the community continue to maintain this document or not ? In other word are there still some
>> persons interested by this document? For what is it used now ?
>>
>> Without answers I will consider that it's not important anymore, but I don't think so, it could turn in a very convenient
>> document at any moment....
>
> This was a necessary document for the ASF incubation effort. While not so necessary now, it is nice to document the libraries
> included in OFBiz, their source, their license, and so on. This is helpful for contributors as well as users.
>
> If no one steps up to manage this document I guess it will deteriorate. We do need to maintain the NOTICE and LICENSE files,
> though we don't really "have to" maintain this page.
>
> -David
I do know that we need to maintain the NOTICE and LICENSE files. Actually my 1st question (some weeks ago) was more complete: if
this document is not updated each time a change happens in OFBiz then we should, at least, mark it as deprecated (or even completly
remove it?), else maybe someone will take it as reference, nothing worse than wrong documentation. We could for instance explain why
it's there, and mark it deprecated, but if anybody care to maintain it (I tried my best to do so, but I gave up recently as found
myself to be almost alone to do so) why not drop it simply ?
Opinions?
Jacques
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> From: "David E Jones" <de...@me.com>
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>
>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>>
>>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>>
>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>>
>> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>>
>> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by Jacques?) from an email of yours
>>
>> -David
>
>
> BTW, it's a bit out of subject but I asked recently if we should stll maintain http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz, because if I recall well lately it was not done, but nobody answered to my question.
> So here it is again :o) should the community continue to maintain this document or not ? In other word are there still some persons interested by this document? For what is it used now ?
>
> Without answers I will consider that it's not important anymore, but I don't think so, it could turn in a very convenient document at any moment....
This was a necessary document for the ASF incubation effort. While not so necessary now, it is nice to document the libraries included in OFBiz, their source, their license, and so on. This is helpful for contributors as well as users.
If no one steps up to manage this document I guess it will deteriorate. We do need to maintain the NOTICE and LICENSE files, though we don't really "have to" maintain this page.
-David
Re: Libraries included in ofbiz: was Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/ser
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "Jacques Le Roux" <ja...@les7arts.com>
: <de...@ofbiz.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: Libraries included in ofbiz: was Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/
specialpurpose/ebay/ser
> From: "Adam Heath" <do...@brainfood.com>
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> BTW, it's a bit out of subject but I asked recently if we should stll
>>> maintain
>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz,
>>> because if I recall well lately it was not done, but nobody answered to
>>> my question.
>>> So here it is again :o) should the community continue to maintain this
>>> document or not ? In other word are there still some persons interested
>>> by this document? For what is it used now ?
>>>
>>> Without answers I will consider that it's not important anymore, but I
>>> don't think so, it could turn in a very convenient document at any
>>> moment....
>>
>> That page needs to be automated. Expand the syntax of LICENSE in
>> trunk, to include more metadata that is easier to extract, and convert
>> it into html.
>>
>> Having the same info copied to multiple places, maintained by hand, is
>> the wrong approach.
>>
>> ps: It's common etiquette to change the subject when converting one
>> thread to another discussion topic
>
> Yes, sorry for the thread hijacking, I wonder if this page is worth such a work, we could simply refer to NOTICE and LICENCE.
> I think in the meantime I will mark it as deprecated.
>
> Jacques
Done, marked http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz,
as deprecated
Jacques
Re: Libraries included in ofbiz: was Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/ser
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "Adam Heath" <do...@brainfood.com>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> BTW, it's a bit out of subject but I asked recently if we should stll
>> maintain
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz,
>> because if I recall well lately it was not done, but nobody answered to
>> my question.
>> So here it is again :o) should the community continue to maintain this
>> document or not ? In other word are there still some persons interested
>> by this document? For what is it used now ?
>>
>> Without answers I will consider that it's not important anymore, but I
>> don't think so, it could turn in a very convenient document at any
>> moment....
>
> That page needs to be automated. Expand the syntax of LICENSE in
> trunk, to include more metadata that is easier to extract, and convert
> it into html.
>
> Having the same info copied to multiple places, maintained by hand, is
> the wrong approach.
>
> ps: It's common etiquette to change the subject when converting one
> thread to another discussion topic
Yes, sorry for the thread hijacking, I wonder if this page is worth such a work, we could simply refer to NOTICE and LICENCE.
I think in the meantime I will mark it as deprecated.
Jacques
Libraries included in ofbiz: was Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] -
in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/
specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> BTW, it's a bit out of subject but I asked recently if we should stll
> maintain
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz,
> because if I recall well lately it was not done, but nobody answered to
> my question.
> So here it is again :o) should the community continue to maintain this
> document or not ? In other word are there still some persons interested
> by this document? For what is it used now ?
>
> Without answers I will consider that it's not important anymore, but I
> don't think so, it could turn in a very convenient document at any
> moment....
That page needs to be automated. Expand the syntax of LICENSE in
trunk, to include more metadata that is easier to extract, and convert
it into html.
Having the same info copied to multiple places, maintained by hand, is
the wrong approach.
ps: It's common etiquette to change the subject when converting one
thread to another discussion topic
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "David E Jones" <de...@me.com>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>
>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't
>>> remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>
> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>
> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by
> Jacques?) from an email of yours
>
> -David
BTW, it's a bit out of subject but I asked recently if we should stll maintain
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Libraries+Included+in+OFBiz, because if I recall well lately it was not done,
but nobody answered to my question.
So here it is again :o) should the community continue to maintain this document or not ? In other word are there still some persons
interested by this document? For what is it used now ?
Without answers I will consider that it's not important anymore, but I don't think so, it could turn in a very convenient document
at any moment....
Thanks
Jacques
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
I certainly wouldn't want to stand in the way of everyone getting what they're looking for... ;)
-David
On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Please answer the rest of the questions and help to provide a way forward so that everyone can get what they're looking for - thanks.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:20 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>
>>> Wow David, you certainly seem to be fighting for the ability for people to NOT do things that everyone is clamoring for - review the commits in depth and break them up - why the resistance?
>>
>> Then you misunderstand what I've written.
>>
>> Have you noticed that whatever has been done isn't working so well to get the result people desire? That's what I'm trying to address.
>
> Yes, I have noticed that this commit in particular is not getting the result that the committer desired. I can't imagine that the committer was looking for a hundred responses to what was done.
>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>> Do you not think that the committer should've broken this up? Do you not think that the community would be in a better place if these practices were followed? Shall the rest of us spend more time documenting this?
>>>
>>> I think we've all asked about these in the past and the community has asked for these things not to continue - what should be our next step if we'd like to get the committers roles and responsibilities more clearly defined so that we can stop wasting time on things that shouldn't be making their way into the project in these forms?
>>>
>>> I'm open to anything - not trying to fight with you - just wondering how we can skip this step of internal review in the future.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>>
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:09 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>>>>
>>>> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>>>>
>>>> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by Jacques?) from an email of yours
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Please answer the rest of the questions and help to provide a way forward so that everyone can get what they're looking for - thanks.
Cheers,
Ruppert
On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:20 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> Wow David, you certainly seem to be fighting for the ability for people to NOT do things that everyone is clamoring for - review the commits in depth and break them up - why the resistance?
>
> Then you misunderstand what I've written.
>
> Have you noticed that whatever has been done isn't working so well to get the result people desire? That's what I'm trying to address.
Yes, I have noticed that this commit in particular is not getting the result that the committer desired. I can't imagine that the committer was looking for a hundred responses to what was done.
> -David
>
>
>> Do you not think that the committer should've broken this up? Do you not think that the community would be in a better place if these practices were followed? Shall the rest of us spend more time documenting this?
>>
>> I think we've all asked about these in the past and the community has asked for these things not to continue - what should be our next step if we'd like to get the committers roles and responsibilities more clearly defined so that we can stop wasting time on things that shouldn't be making their way into the project in these forms?
>>
>> I'm open to anything - not trying to fight with you - just wondering how we can skip this step of internal review in the future.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>>
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:09 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>
>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>>>
>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>>>
>>> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>>>
>>> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by Jacques?) from an email of yours
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Wow David, you certainly seem to be fighting for the ability for people to NOT do things that everyone is clamoring for - review the commits in depth and break them up - why the resistance?
Then you misunderstand what I've written.
Have you noticed that whatever has been done isn't working so well to get the result people desire? That's what I'm trying to address.
-David
> Do you not think that the committer should've broken this up? Do you not think that the community would be in a better place if these practices were followed? Shall the rest of us spend more time documenting this?
>
> I think we've all asked about these in the past and the community has asked for these things not to continue - what should be our next step if we'd like to get the committers roles and responsibilities more clearly defined so that we can stop wasting time on things that shouldn't be making their way into the project in these forms?
>
> I'm open to anything - not trying to fight with you - just wondering how we can skip this step of internal review in the future.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:09 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>
>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>>
>>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>>
>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>>
>> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>>
>> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by Jacques?) from an email of yours
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Wow David, you certainly seem to be fighting for the ability for people to NOT do things that everyone is clamoring for - review the commits in depth and break them up - why the resistance? Do you not think that the committer should've broken this up? Do you not think that the community would be in a better place if these practices were followed? Shall the rest of us spend more time documenting this?
I think we've all asked about these in the past and the community has asked for these things not to continue - what should be our next step if we'd like to get the committers roles and responsibilities more clearly defined so that we can stop wasting time on things that shouldn't be making their way into the project in these forms?
I'm open to anything - not trying to fight with you - just wondering how we can skip this step of internal review in the future.
Cheers,
Ruppert
On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:09 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>>
>>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>>
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>
> 1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
>
> 2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by Jacques?) from an email of yours
>
> -David
>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:02 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
> David E Jones wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>
>>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>>
>> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
1. anyone can change that page, and many have with no discussion or agreement
2. I don't see anything there about this required work that you speak of, except some vague ideas that appear to be copied (by Jacques?) from an email of yours
-David
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
David E Jones wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>
>> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
>> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
>> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
>
> Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
> It's interesting how people banter about the terms "policy" and "best practices" and speak of these sorts of requirements and obligations. I'm glad we're all so interested in trying to force each other to do things, or rather since there is no force available to us then imply some sort of agreement that everyone has accepted, or some sort of obligation that is implied by being a committer.
>
> Aren't there better ways of working together?
>
> -David
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
On Jan 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
> Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
> have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
> *requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
Where is the stone this is etched in? I don't recall ever seeing any fire from heaven that etched this into stone, and I don't remember ever discussing and agreeing to any such thing.
It's interesting how people banter about the terms "policy" and "best practices" and speak of these sorts of requirements and obligations. I'm glad we're all so interested in trying to force each other to do things, or rather since there is no force available to us then imply some sort of agreement that everyone has accepted, or some sort of obligation that is implied by being a committer.
Aren't there better ways of working together?
-David
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Tim Ruppert wrote:
> This is agreed Adam - but since I was talking to a particular committer and a particular commit, I used the committer's name. In the future, if this is our new policy, I'd be happy to simply refer to the committer as "committer".
>
> This was indeed meant for each and everyone with commit privileges, but this was a particularly egregious example of just slamming in code without reviewing it first (and blaming it on the contributor to boot) and really shouldn't be allowed going forward IMO. As David mentioned, making code better is a group effort, and here's to hoping that the group gets more of a chance next time rather than it already being dumped into the system and getting to sort it out after the fact.
Of course, we all have to follow these same rules/guidelines as well.
As everyone here is aware, I follow these guidelines very closely.
You've all seen my commit floods, where I'll do 10 or more commits in
rapid succession. I use git to do this.
Just to be fair, I do not do development in small steps. I do a
single large feature, committing whenever I feel like I need to save
my work. During this development, I do not care at all what commit
messages I use.
When I finally get it done, I use git rebase -i, which allows me to
split up commits, combine commits, reorder then, change commit
messages, to get the new work in a functional, easy to digest state.
Then, once that is done, I can go and run the tests at any point along
that history, to verify things work correctly. Once all that is
finally done, I end up doing the final commit flood back to svn.
Yes, this is more work. That isn't the question. But, when working
with a community project, it is one of the requirements that must be
followed. We have all signed the CLA for apache; doing so meant we
also had to read what being a committer actually entailed.
Now, to get more personal.
Hans, if the reason you don't do commit breakups is because you don't
have time, then that is not a valid reason. Being an ofbiz committer
*requires* you to do this extra work. That is non-negotiable.
However, if you say you don't know how, or have no idea how to do
that, then that is ok; there are systems out there to help you with
that. My favorite(wait for it, I bet you can't guess what I am going
to say) is git. But even that is not nescessary. At the very least,
use svn diff before you commit. Learn to edit patch files
directly(adding/removing/changing chunks, order, adding lines in the
middle of a patch). Use an editor that supports coloring of diffs(do
google searches).
ps: even before I started using git with ofbiz, I would do the same
workflow with plain-jane svn. I just wouldn't commit anything, would
make copys of files and directories, would *retype the same set of
changes by hand*. This is just something I've always done, and I just
consider it part of what I must do to work with other people.
pps: for customer based single use sites, I don't follow these steps;
when code is a one-off implementation, I tend to do large commits.
However, if we(brainfood) decide that some customer code has something
that might be useful on our other sites, when I go to copy that code,
I then start splitting it up into small changes.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
This is agreed Adam - but since I was talking to a particular committer and a particular commit, I used the committer's name. In the future, if this is our new policy, I'd be happy to simply refer to the committer as "committer".
This was indeed meant for each and everyone with commit privileges, but this was a particularly egregious example of just slamming in code without reviewing it first (and blaming it on the contributor to boot) and really shouldn't be allowed going forward IMO. As David mentioned, making code better is a group effort, and here's to hoping that the group gets more of a chance next time rather than it already being dumped into the system and getting to sort it out after the fact.
Cheers,
Ruppert
On Jan 26, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
> Adrian Crum wrote:
>> For those of you who didn't bother to read the entire thread, the
>> comments in it were specific:
>>
>> 1. Hans made a large commit
>> 2. Adam criticized the commit, asked Hans to break it up into smaller
>> pieces
>> 3. Hans blamed one of his workers
>> 4. Tim commented that Hans has an obligation to make good commits
>> 5. David accused Tim of picking a fight
>> 6. Tim responded to David's accusation
>> 7. I supported Tim, saying Hans' reputation has earned him additional
>> scrutiny
>
> Except that in step 4, Tim mentioned Hans; if he had removed that
> single word, I would have sided(I hate that term in this situation)
> with Tim.
>
> Yes, is a very small change. But if you re-read my mail, I didn't
> mention any particular person. I just used generic pronouns. I do
> that, so my explanations can be applied to *anyone*, as we *all* must
> follow these rules.
>
> When a lone person is singled out, it is taken to mean that the rules
> or discussion only apply to the target, instead of all.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Adrian Crum wrote:
> For those of you who didn't bother to read the entire thread, the
> comments in it were specific:
>
> 1. Hans made a large commit
> 2. Adam criticized the commit, asked Hans to break it up into smaller
> pieces
> 3. Hans blamed one of his workers
> 4. Tim commented that Hans has an obligation to make good commits
> 5. David accused Tim of picking a fight
> 6. Tim responded to David's accusation
> 7. I supported Tim, saying Hans' reputation has earned him additional
> scrutiny
Except that in step 4, Tim mentioned Hans; if he had removed that
single word, I would have sided(I hate that term in this situation)
with Tim.
Yes, is a very small change. But if you re-read my mail, I didn't
mention any particular person. I just used generic pronouns. I do
that, so my explanations can be applied to *anyone*, as we *all* must
follow these rules.
When a lone person is singled out, it is taken to mean that the rules
or discussion only apply to the target, instead of all.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>.
For those of you who didn't bother to read the entire thread, the
comments in it were specific:
1. Hans made a large commit
2. Adam criticized the commit, asked Hans to break it up into smaller pieces
3. Hans blamed one of his workers
4. Tim commented that Hans has an obligation to make good commits
5. David accused Tim of picking a fight
6. Tim responded to David's accusation
7. I supported Tim, saying Hans' reputation has earned him additional
scrutiny
I understand David and Jacopo are trying to be diplomatic, but in this
particular case it is counter-productive. Sometimes you just have to
call a spade a spade.
I would go into more detail about why I said what I did about Hans, but
right now I'm too busy fixing the code he broke.
-Adrian
David E Jones wrote:
> Thanks Jacopo this makes a good distinction.
>
> We need peer review, and LOTS of it. We can't "wait" for code to improve because code doesn't just automatically improve over time, someone has to improve it and specific feedback on code itself will help with that.
>
> I don't see any reason to talk about the people or guesses about the behavior that caused code problems (which is silly, how do you know?).
>
> I'd argue that much of the feedback to Hans has not been specific or focused on the code, but rather either personal things or guesses at behavior behind the code or general trends that are of limited usefulness when it comes to improving the code. What's the point of any of that?
>
> -David
>
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>
>> I understand the concerns and remarks but please, let's try to stay focused on specific details (that needs to be fixed): only in this way the conversation will be useful and we will help each other to get better code.
>> If instead we make general assumptions on other's work (like defining the effort of a committer "a mess" or the effort of a "beginner programmer") we will just end up with people being offended and defensive.
>>
>> "make code not war" :-)
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>
>>> Tim,
>>>
>>> I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you. It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
>>>
>>> If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have had a detrimental effect on the project.
>>>
>>> Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You have my support.
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>>>> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices. What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> hans
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>
>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
Thanks Jacopo this makes a good distinction.
We need peer review, and LOTS of it. We can't "wait" for code to improve because code doesn't just automatically improve over time, someone has to improve it and specific feedback on code itself will help with that.
I don't see any reason to talk about the people or guesses about the behavior that caused code problems (which is silly, how do you know?).
I'd argue that much of the feedback to Hans has not been specific or focused on the code, but rather either personal things or guesses at behavior behind the code or general trends that are of limited usefulness when it comes to improving the code. What's the point of any of that?
-David
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> I understand the concerns and remarks but please, let's try to stay focused on specific details (that needs to be fixed): only in this way the conversation will be useful and we will help each other to get better code.
> If instead we make general assumptions on other's work (like defining the effort of a committer "a mess" or the effort of a "beginner programmer") we will just end up with people being offended and defensive.
>
> "make code not war" :-)
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>
>> Tim,
>>
>> I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you. It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
>>
>> If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have had a detrimental effect on the project.
>>
>> Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You have my support.
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>>
>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>>> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices. What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>> --
>>> Tim Ruppert
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>> o:801.649.6594
>>> f:801.649.6595
>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>>>
>>>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> hans
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On Jan 26, 2010, at 5:21 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> Jacopo,
>
> No one is trying to make war. The details have been pointed out in previous threads and in Jira issues.
>
Yes, I am aware of this; and this is the right way to go, this with a lot of patience and perseverance
And just to be super clear: I was not accusing you (or anyone else) of trying to fight; I was just saying that general statements like the ones I have noticed could cause people being defensive, trying to demonstrate they are right instead of trying to understand how to make better code.
Jacopo
> -Adrian
>
>
> Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>> I understand the concerns and remarks but please, let's try to stay focused on specific details (that needs to be fixed): only in this way the conversation will be useful and we will help each other to get better code.
>> If instead we make general assumptions on other's work (like defining the effort of a committer "a mess" or the effort of a "beginner programmer") we will just end up with people being offended and defensive.
>> "make code not war" :-)
>> Jacopo
>> On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>> Tim,
>>>
>>> I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you. It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
>>>
>>> If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have had a detrimental effect on the project.
>>>
>>> Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You have my support.
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>>>> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices. What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> hans
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>>>>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Adrian Crum wrote:
> Jacopo,
>
> No one is trying to make war. The details have been pointed out in
> previous threads and in Jira issues.
make: *** No rule to make target `war'. Stop.
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>.
Jacopo,
No one is trying to make war. The details have been pointed out in
previous threads and in Jira issues.
-Adrian
Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> I understand the concerns and remarks but please, let's try to stay focused on specific details (that needs to be fixed): only in this way the conversation will be useful and we will help each other to get better code.
> If instead we make general assumptions on other's work (like defining the effort of a committer "a mess" or the effort of a "beginner programmer") we will just end up with people being offended and defensive.
>
> "make code not war" :-)
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>
>> Tim,
>>
>> I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you. It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
>>
>> If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have had a detrimental effect on the project.
>>
>> Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You have my support.
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>>
>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>>> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices. What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>> --
>>> Tim Ruppert
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>> o:801.649.6594
>>> f:801.649.6595
>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>>>
>>>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> hans
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>>>
>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
I understand the concerns and remarks but please, let's try to stay focused on specific details (that needs to be fixed): only in this way the conversation will be useful and we will help each other to get better code.
If instead we make general assumptions on other's work (like defining the effort of a committer "a mess" or the effort of a "beginner programmer") we will just end up with people being offended and defensive.
"make code not war" :-)
Jacopo
On Jan 26, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> Tim,
>
> I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you. It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
>
> If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have had a detrimental effect on the project.
>
> Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You have my support.
>
> -Adrian
>
>
> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices. What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>> --
>> Tim Ruppert
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>> o:801.649.6594
>> f:801.649.6595
>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>>
>>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>
>>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>>
>>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> hans
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>.
Tim,
I didn't take your remark as condescending - in fact I agree with you.
It isn't okay for any committer to simply pass the buck (or blame).
If Hans seems to be a frequent target for commit remarks it is because
he earned it. There have been too many times when he has checked in code
that was written by beginner programmers without reviewing it first. Or
he has changed code without understanding it first. Those behaviors have
had a detrimental effect on the project.
Please don't stop pushing for code quality and responsible commits. You
have my support.
-Adrian
Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
>
> It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices.
>
> What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
> --
> Tim Ruppert
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> o:801.649.6594
> f:801.649.6595
>
> On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
>> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>>
>> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>
>>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>> --
>>> Tim Ruppert
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> o:801.649.6594
>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Adam,
>>>>
>>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> hans
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>>
>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> function leave feedback and screen
>>>>>> - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>>> --
>>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Not trying to - but sorry for the tone if it came across that way Hans. I'm simply asking why it gets past the committer's desk as "I'm trying to get my people to provide smaller pieces" is an ok way of committing code. Isn't that the responsibility of the committer to tell the person that's providing the code to go back to the drawing board and break it up? Isn't that our job as committers? And as the rest of the committers, isn't it our job to remind the offending committer to spend more time with the person who's providing the code so that we don't have to dig thru this much mess?
It's not always easy for any of us, but I just don't see this from other people, so I wanted to remind Hans. If all the other committers think this is ok (which obviously they didn't since Adam brought it up), then I'll happily back off. Since that's not the case - and this obviously doesn't follow the best practices of the project - please let me know how I should encourage Hans to do what is clearly in our best practices.
What should be done is that this mess of a commit should be reverted and put back in in pieces - you have to start somewhere and sometimes it's just not good enough when you have an entire community to just say you're trying hard. My two cents.
Cheers,
Ruppert
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Jan 25, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
>
> I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
>
> -David
>
>
> On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>> --
>> Tim Ruppert
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> o:801.649.6594
>> f:801.649.6595
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>>
>>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> hans
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>>
>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>>> Log:
>>>>>
>>>>> function leave feedback and screen
>>>>> - function auto relist item and screen
>>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>>
>>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>>> --
>>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>>
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by David E Jones <de...@me.com>.
This seems to be a little bit condescending. Trying to pick another fight?
I'm just glad to have ring-side seats... ;)
-David
On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
> As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
> --
> Tim Ruppert
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> o:801.649.6594
> f:801.649.6595
>
> On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
>> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>>
>> Regards,
>> hans
>>
>> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>>> Author: hansbak
>>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>>
>>>> function leave feedback and screen
>>>> - function auto relist item and screen
>>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>>> - help screens are provided
>>>
>>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>>> it easier to verify and debug.
>> --
>> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>>
>
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
As the committer, you can just not put them into OFBiz until they are of better quality Hans - that is your obligation and something that the rest of us abide to. Please do better in the future - we know you're trying - but just because you've received it doesn't mean you have to commit it - you can just wait until it's in good enough shape to commit it ...
Cheers,
Ruppert
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Jan 25, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>
> Regards,
> hans
>
> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
>> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: hansbak
>>> Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
>>> New Revision: 902716
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>>
>>> function leave feedback and screen
>>> - function auto relist item and screen
>>> - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
>>> - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
>>> - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
>>> - help screens are provided
>>
>> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
>> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
>> it easier to verify and debug.
> --
> Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
>
Re: general answer commit 902716 was: Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2]
- in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/
specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Hans Bakker wrote:
> I used the statistics from Markmail at:
> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/search/?q=ofbiz#query:ofbiz%20type%3Acheckins%
> 20list%3Aorg.apache.ofbiz.commits%20date%3A200901-200912%20+page:1
> +state:facets
>
> 2 or 3 the argument is still is valid.
Email list archives are not good enough. Email can get lost. I
checked the actual real source repository.
Re: general answer commit 902716 was: Re: svn commit: r902716
[1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/
specialpurpose/ebay/ specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Hans Bakker <ma...@antwebsystems.com>.
I used the statistics from Markmail at:
http://ofbiz.markmail.org/search/?q=ofbiz#query:ofbiz%20type%3Acheckins%
20list%3Aorg.apache.ofbiz.commits%20date%3A200901-200912%20+page:1
+state:facets
2 or 3 the argument is still is valid.
Regards,
Hans
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 11:26 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> Hans Bakker wrote:
> > I am aware that some of my many commits (at the moment a bit less) but
> > last year an average of 3 per day, for 7 days a week sometimes have
> > errors. I always try to fix these as quick as we can. Why? because i
> > have the same passion as all of you.
>
> Hmm, interesting datapoint. So here are some numbers to back up that
> claim:
>
> 2 Author: sichen <si...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 3 Author: asf-sync-process
> <as...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 3 Author: ruppert <ru...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 5 Author: byersa <by...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 8 Author: erwan <er...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 9 Author: eckardjf <ec...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 21 Author: chrisg <ch...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 45 Author: bibryam <bi...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 97 Author: jaz <ja...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 163 Author: mrisaliti <mr...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 203 Author: buscob <bu...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 207 Author: jonesde <jo...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 211 Author: adrianc <ad...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 286 Author: jacopoc <ja...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 310 Author: mor <mo...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 325 Author: lektran <le...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 336 Author: apatel <ap...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 429 Author: ashish <as...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 466 Author: doogie <do...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 697 Author: hansbak <ha...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
> 1147 Author: jleroux <jl...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
>
> This is for the year of 2009. So no, you don't do 3 per day; 1.9 is
> the actual number. If you are considering just the work week(5 days),
> then the number approaches 2.67. However, ofbiz is 365/7, so you
> can't consider the work week.
>
> Again, these numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. They
> really don't mean a whole lot.
--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
Re: general answer commit 902716 was: Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2]
- in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/
specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/ specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Hans Bakker wrote:
> I am aware that some of my many commits (at the moment a bit less) but
> last year an average of 3 per day, for 7 days a week sometimes have
> errors. I always try to fix these as quick as we can. Why? because i
> have the same passion as all of you.
Hmm, interesting datapoint. So here are some numbers to back up that
claim:
2 Author: sichen <si...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
3 Author: asf-sync-process
<as...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
3 Author: ruppert <ru...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
5 Author: byersa <by...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
8 Author: erwan <er...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
9 Author: eckardjf <ec...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
21 Author: chrisg <ch...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
45 Author: bibryam <bi...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
97 Author: jaz <ja...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
163 Author: mrisaliti <mr...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
203 Author: buscob <bu...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
207 Author: jonesde <jo...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
211 Author: adrianc <ad...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
286 Author: jacopoc <ja...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
310 Author: mor <mo...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
325 Author: lektran <le...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
336 Author: apatel <ap...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
429 Author: ashish <as...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
466 Author: doogie <do...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
697 Author: hansbak <ha...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
1147 Author: jleroux <jl...@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68>
This is for the year of 2009. So no, you don't do 3 per day; 1.9 is
the actual number. If you are considering just the work week(5 days),
then the number approaches 2.67. However, ofbiz is 365/7, so you
can't consider the work week.
Again, these numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. They
really don't mean a whole lot.
general answer commit 902716 was: Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] -
in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Hans Bakker <ma...@antwebsystems.com>.
Hi all OFBiz supporters!
woooow you all had a busy day yesterday! I had a good night sleep when
most of it happened. Below the original message what started it all and
my answer on it.
And then another 58(!) messages followed the 2 below.
First my apologies if i did offend anybody with this commit. I think the
commit itself is very useful and we are not finished yet, but sure it
was big. As this was a complete new feature independent of the current
ebay component features I thought it was not such a problem. 10 small
updates in one go or one big one what is the difference if everything is
new and not related to existing code anyway. But as i said we will try
harder.
Reading all these messages, I see a lot of passion from a lot of people
with different interests. Some are solely technical oriented, others
more functional, others who only want improve existing functionality,
others who want new functionality and some want to improve the
documentation side of things.
So this is surely a good thing, with a big disadvantage: emotions.
Because of these emotions often things go in the personal direction. One
comment i can remember well:
Judge commits on the functional and technical benefits and ignore the
persons name who did it.
I am aware that some of my many commits (at the moment a bit less) but
last year an average of 3 per day, for 7 days a week sometimes have
errors. I always try to fix these as quick as we can. Why? because i
have the same passion as all of you.
So please lets work together, and build on each others work and not try
to brake it down.
Regards,
Hans
On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 06:28 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
> smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
>
> Regards,
> hans
>
> On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> > hansbak@apache.org wrote:
> > > Author: hansbak
> > > Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
> > > New Revision: 902716
> > >
> > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
> > > Log:
> > >
> > > function leave feedback and screen
> > > - function auto relist item and screen
> > > - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
> > > - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
> > > - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
> > > - help screens are provided
> >
> > this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
> > considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
> > it easier to verify and debug.
--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
Re: svn commit: r902716 [1/2] - in /ofbiz/trunk:
framework/images/webapp/images/rate/ specialpurpose/ebay/
specialpurpose/ebay/config/ specialpurpose/ebay/data/
specialpurpose/ebay/data/helpdata/ specialpurpose/ebay/servicedef/
specialpurpose/ebay/src/org/...
Posted by Hans Bakker <ma...@antwebsystems.com>.
Hi Adam,
comment accepted, i am trying to get my people to provide stuff in
smaller pieces. Not always easy but we try to do better.
Regards,
hans
On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 12:28 -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> hansbak@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: hansbak
> > Date: Mon Jan 25 06:26:23 2010
> > New Revision: 902716
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=902716&view=rev
> > Log:
> >
> > function leave feedback and screen
> > - function auto relist item and screen
> > - Get feedback data from ebay site and save into ofbiz.
> > - Add rate pictures into framework/images/webapp/images
> > - screen for show awaiting feedback and recent feedback from buyer
> > - help screens are provided
>
> this was a bad commit, too many things done at once. Please try to be
> considerate of long-term maintainability, having small commits makes
> it easier to verify and debug.
--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates