You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openmeetings.apache.org by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com> on 2012/09/06 13:40:59 UTC
inconsistent package structure with ASF
Hi,
one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package structure.
We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
Our package structure is:
org.openmeetings.*
it should be:
org.apache.openmeetings.*
Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
potenial issues when doing this change?
configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
package path's in the scripts?
Sebastian
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
Packaged are renamed.
The only potential issue I can see is
"org.openmeetings.utils.crypt.MD5Implementation" config value.
Since I have added import/export of config values it might be imported with
wrong value ... not sure what is the best way to handle it
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>wrote:
> You did everything right (from my point of view)
> I would only add some general component like base form with save/new
> buttons on the top to generalize interface.
>
> You already create UserForm with new Users() as model object by default
> and set ModelObject to the currently selected user.
> That was exactly what I was thinking of.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:45 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> *you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)*
>> Yes that was the point where I wondered if it okayto re-add an already
>> added form.
>>
>> *I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.,
>> I can modify your code a little bit to give an example*
>> => Please do so :)
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Sebastian
>>
>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> > I get it!
>> >
>> > you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)
>> > by this call you tell Wicket to send new version of component to the
>> page.
>> > So it is OK to re-add it
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> I would not add/remove Form
>> >> I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.
>> >>
>> >> I can modify your code a little bit to give an example
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:42 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> One question on my tiny wicket script attempts :)
>> >>> If you add something, [in my example target.add(form) ]
>> >>> shouldn't I remove the form before adding it?
>> >>> Or does wicket care about it automatically?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>> Sebastian
>> >>>
>> >>> 2012/9/6 seba.wagner@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com>:
>> >>> > I would not rename Java Objects now.
>> >>> > They have influence on the client side.
>> >>> > I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as
>> we
>> >>> > can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
>> >>> > Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do
>> it
>> >>> > in Wicket too?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Sebastian
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> >>> >> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe
>> >>> dao.entity
>> >>> >> and move entities to one folder with same naming
>> >>> >> like:
>> >>> >> PollType -> RoomPollType
>> >>> >> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> What do you think?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> Sure,
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the
>> packages.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Sebastian
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> >>> >>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
>> >>> >>> > like have
>> >>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
>> >>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <
>> >>> solomax666@gmail.com
>> >>> >>> >wrote:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
>> >>> >>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
>> >>> >>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> I can handle it
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> >>> >>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>> Hi,
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our
>> >>> package
>> >>> >>> >>> structure.
>> >>> >>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> Our package structure is:
>> >>> >>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
>> >>> >>> >>> it should be:
>> >>> >>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>> >>> >>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could
>> be
>> >>> >>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>> >>> >>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some
>> of the
>> >>> >>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> Sebastian
>> >>> >>> >>> --
>> >>> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >>> >> WBR
>> >>> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > --
>> >>> >>> > WBR
>> >>> >>> > Maxim aka solomax
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> --
>> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >> WBR
>> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> > http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> > seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> WBR
>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > WBR
>> > Maxim aka solomax
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
You did everything right (from my point of view)
I would only add some general component like base form with save/new
buttons on the top to generalize interface.
You already create UserForm with new Users() as model object by default and
set ModelObject to the currently selected user.
That was exactly what I was thinking of.
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:45 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
> wrote:
> *you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)*
> Yes that was the point where I wondered if it okayto re-add an already
> added form.
>
> *I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.,
> I can modify your code a little bit to give an example*
> => Please do so :)
>
> Thanks!
> Sebastian
>
> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> > I get it!
> >
> > you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)
> > by this call you tell Wicket to send new version of component to the
> page.
> > So it is OK to re-add it
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I would not add/remove Form
> >> I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.
> >>
> >> I can modify your code a little bit to give an example
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:42 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> One question on my tiny wicket script attempts :)
> >>> If you add something, [in my example target.add(form) ]
> >>> shouldn't I remove the form before adding it?
> >>> Or does wicket care about it automatically?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> Sebastian
> >>>
> >>> 2012/9/6 seba.wagner@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com>:
> >>> > I would not rename Java Objects now.
> >>> > They have influence on the client side.
> >>> > I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as we
> >>> > can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
> >>> >
> >>> > I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
> >>> > Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do
> it
> >>> > in Wicket too?
> >>> >
> >>> > Sebastian
> >>> >
> >>> > 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> >>> >> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe
> >>> dao.entity
> >>> >> and move entities to one folder with same naming
> >>> >> like:
> >>> >> PollType -> RoomPollType
> >>> >> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> What do you think?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Sure,
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the
> packages.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Sebastian
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> >>> >>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
> >>> >>> > like have
> >>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
> >>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <
> >>> solomax666@gmail.com
> >>> >>> >wrote:
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
> >>> >>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
> >>> >>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> I can handle it
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> >>> >>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >>> Hi,
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our
> >>> package
> >>> >>> >>> structure.
> >>> >>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>> Our package structure is:
> >>> >>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
> >>> >>> >>> it should be:
> >>> >>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
> >>> >>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could
> be
> >>> >>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
> >>> >>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of
> the
> >>> >>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>> Sebastian
> >>> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
> >>> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> --
> >>> >>> >> WBR
> >>> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > --
> >>> >>> > WBR
> >>> >>> > Maxim aka solomax
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> WBR
> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Sebastian Wagner
> >>> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> > http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> > seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sebastian Wagner
> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> WBR
> >> Maxim aka solomax
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com>.
*you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)*
Yes that was the point where I wondered if it okayto re-add an already
added form.
*I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.,
I can modify your code a little bit to give an example*
=> Please do so :)
Thanks!
Sebastian
2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> I get it!
>
> you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)
> by this call you tell Wicket to send new version of component to the page.
> So it is OK to re-add it
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I would not add/remove Form
>> I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.
>>
>> I can modify your code a little bit to give an example
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:42 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> One question on my tiny wicket script attempts :)
>>> If you add something, [in my example target.add(form) ]
>>> shouldn't I remove the form before adding it?
>>> Or does wicket care about it automatically?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Sebastian
>>>
>>> 2012/9/6 seba.wagner@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com>:
>>> > I would not rename Java Objects now.
>>> > They have influence on the client side.
>>> > I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as we
>>> > can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
>>> >
>>> > I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
>>> > Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do it
>>> > in Wicket too?
>>> >
>>> > Sebastian
>>> >
>>> > 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>>> >> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe
>>> dao.entity
>>> >> and move entities to one folder with same naming
>>> >> like:
>>> >> PollType -> RoomPollType
>>> >> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
>>> >>
>>> >> What do you think?
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Sure,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sebastian
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>>> >>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
>>> >>> > like have
>>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
>>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <
>>> solomax666@gmail.com
>>> >>> >wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
>>> >>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
>>> >>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> I can handle it
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>> >>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> Hi,
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our
>>> package
>>> >>> >>> structure.
>>> >>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Our package structure is:
>>> >>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
>>> >>> >>> it should be:
>>> >>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>>> >>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
>>> >>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>>> >>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
>>> >>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Sebastian
>>> >>> >>> --
>>> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> --
>>> >>> >> WBR
>>> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > --
>>> >>> > WBR
>>> >>> > Maxim aka solomax
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> WBR
>>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Sebastian Wagner
>>> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> > http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> > seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
I get it!
you are talking about AjaxRequestTarget.add(form)
by this call you tell Wicket to send new version of component to the page.
So it is OK to re-add it
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I would not add/remove Form
> I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.
>
> I can modify your code a little bit to give an example
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:42 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One question on my tiny wicket script attempts :)
>> If you add something, [in my example target.add(form) ]
>> shouldn't I remove the form before adding it?
>> Or does wicket care about it automatically?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Sebastian
>>
>> 2012/9/6 seba.wagner@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com>:
>> > I would not rename Java Objects now.
>> > They have influence on the client side.
>> > I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as we
>> > can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
>> >
>> > I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
>> > Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do it
>> > in Wicket too?
>> >
>> > Sebastian
>> >
>> > 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> >> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe
>> dao.entity
>> >> and move entities to one folder with same naming
>> >> like:
>> >> PollType -> RoomPollType
>> >> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
>> >>
>> >> What do you think?
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Sure,
>> >>>
>> >>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sebastian
>> >>>
>> >>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> >>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
>> >>> > like have
>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
>> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <
>> solomax666@gmail.com
>> >>> >wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
>> >>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
>> >>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I can handle it
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> >>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> Hi,
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our
>> package
>> >>> >>> structure.
>> >>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Our package structure is:
>> >>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
>> >>> >>> it should be:
>> >>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>> >>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
>> >>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>> >>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
>> >>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Sebastian
>> >>> >>> --
>> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >> WBR
>> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > WBR
>> >>> > Maxim aka solomax
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> WBR
>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sebastian Wagner
>> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> > http://www.webbase-design.de
>> > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> > seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
I would not add/remove Form
I would leave form on the page, but change the underlying object.
I can modify your code a little bit to give an example
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:42 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
> wrote:
> One question on my tiny wicket script attempts :)
> If you add something, [in my example target.add(form) ]
> shouldn't I remove the form before adding it?
> Or does wicket care about it automatically?
>
> Thanks!
> Sebastian
>
> 2012/9/6 seba.wagner@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com>:
> > I would not rename Java Objects now.
> > They have influence on the client side.
> > I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as we
> > can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
> >
> > I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
> > Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do it
> > in Wicket too?
> >
> > Sebastian
> >
> > 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> >> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe
> dao.entity
> >> and move entities to one folder with same naming
> >> like:
> >> PollType -> RoomPollType
> >> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sure,
> >>>
> >>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
> >>>
> >>> Sebastian
> >>>
> >>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> >>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
> >>> > like have
> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
> >>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <
> solomax666@gmail.com
> >>> >wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
> >>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
> >>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I can handle it
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> >>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Hi,
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our
> package
> >>> >>> structure.
> >>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Our package structure is:
> >>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
> >>> >>> it should be:
> >>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
> >>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
> >>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
> >>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
> >>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Sebastian
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> WBR
> >>> >> Maxim aka solomax
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > WBR
> >>> > Maxim aka solomax
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sebastian Wagner
> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> WBR
> >> Maxim aka solomax
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sebastian Wagner
> > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> > http://www.webbase-design.de
> > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> > seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com>.
One question on my tiny wicket script attempts :)
If you add something, [in my example target.add(form) ]
shouldn't I remove the form before adding it?
Or does wicket care about it automatically?
Thanks!
Sebastian
2012/9/6 seba.wagner@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com>:
> I would not rename Java Objects now.
> They have influence on the client side.
> I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as we
> can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
>
> I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
> Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do it
> in Wicket too?
>
> Sebastian
>
> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe dao.entity
>> and move entities to one folder with same naming
>> like:
>> PollType -> RoomPollType
>> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure,
>>>
>>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
>>>
>>> Sebastian
>>>
>>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
>>> > like have
>>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
>>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
>>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
>>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>>> >>
>>> >> I can handle it
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Hi,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package
>>> >>> structure.
>>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Our package structure is:
>>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
>>> >>> it should be:
>>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
>>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
>>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sebastian
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> WBR
>>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > WBR
>>> > Maxim aka solomax
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com>.
I would not rename Java Objects now.
They have influence on the client side.
I would prefer renaming things when we have refactored to Ajax, as we
can more easily fix the possible changes in the UI.
I have committed a small form component (UserForm.java).
Could you review those script lines if that is the way you would do it
in Wicket too?
Sebastian
2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe dao.entity
> and move entities to one folder with same naming
> like:
> PollType -> RoomPollType
> Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
>
> What do you think?
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>> Sure,
>>
>> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
>>
>> Sebastian
>>
>> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
>> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
>> > like have
>> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
>> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> The only places need also be updated are:
>> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
>> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>> >>
>> >> I can handle it
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package
>> >>> structure.
>> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>> >>>
>> >>> Our package structure is:
>> >>> org.openmeetings.*
>> >>> it should be:
>> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>> >>>
>> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
>> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
>> >>> package path's in the scripts?
>> >>>
>> >>> Sebastian
>> >>> --
>> >>> Sebastian Wagner
>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> WBR
>> >> Maxim aka solomax
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > WBR
>> > Maxim aka solomax
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
What about replacing persistence.beans with data.entity or maybe dao.entity
and move entities to one folder with same naming
like:
PollType -> RoomPollType
Rooms_Organisation -> RoomsOrganisation etc.
What do you think?
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Sure,
>
> maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
>
> Sebastian
>
> 2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> > Maybe we can get rid of app package?
> > like have
> > org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
> > org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <solomax666@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> The only places need also be updated are:
> >> 1) *persistence.xml files
> >> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
> >>
> >> I can handle it
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> >> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package
> >>> structure.
> >>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
> >>>
> >>> Our package structure is:
> >>> org.openmeetings.*
> >>> it should be:
> >>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
> >>>
> >>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
> >>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
> >>> potenial issues when doing this change?
> >>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
> >>> package path's in the scripts?
> >>>
> >>> Sebastian
> >>> --
> >>> Sebastian Wagner
> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> >>> http://www.webbase-design.de
> >>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> >>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> WBR
> >> Maxim aka solomax
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > WBR
> > Maxim aka solomax
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by "seba.wagner@gmail.com" <se...@gmail.com>.
Sure,
maybe at some point it would make sense to group some of the packages.
Sebastian
2012/9/6 Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>:
> Maybe we can get rid of app package?
> like have
> org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
> org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The only places need also be updated are:
>> 1) *persistence.xml files
>> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>>
>> I can handle it
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package
>>> structure.
>>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>>>
>>> Our package structure is:
>>> org.openmeetings.*
>>> it should be:
>>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>>>
>>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
>>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
>>> package path's in the scripts?
>>>
>>> Sebastian
>>> --
>>> Sebastian Wagner
>>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
--
Sebastian Wagner
https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
http://www.webbase-design.de
http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
seba.wagner@gmail.com
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
Maybe we can get rid of app package?
like have
org.apache.openmeetings.data package instead of
org.apache.openmeetings.app.data?
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>wrote:
> The only places need also be updated are:
> 1) *persistence.xml files
> 2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
>
> I can handle it
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <
> seba.wagner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package
>> structure.
>> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>>
>> Our package structure is:
>> org.openmeetings.*
>> it should be:
>> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>>
>> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
>> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
>> potenial issues when doing this change?
>> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
>> package path's in the scripts?
>>
>> Sebastian
>> --
>> Sebastian Wagner
>> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
>> http://www.webbase-design.de
>> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
>> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax
Re: inconsistent package structure with ASF
Posted by Maxim Solodovnik <so...@gmail.com>.
The only places need also be updated are:
1) *persistence.xml files
2) openmeetings-applicationContext.xml
I can handle it
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:40 PM, seba.wagner@gmail.com <seba.wagner@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> one thing I constantly notice but did not resolve yet is our package
> structure.
> We should fix that before we try to apply to graduate.
>
> Our package structure is:
> org.openmeetings.*
> it should be:
> org.apache.openmeetings.*
>
> Maybe it is a good moment to do that refactoring right now.
> What do you think, are there critical areas where there could be
> potenial issues when doing this change?
> configs? What about the CLI installer, does it rely on some of the
> package path's in the scripts?
>
> Sebastian
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> seba.wagner@gmail.com
>
--
WBR
Maxim aka solomax