[DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Pierre Smits
Hi all,

Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in the
Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).

Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.

What do you think?

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Adrian Crum-3
I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
yesterday and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported
still exist, plus I found another one.

I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.

Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
trunk. The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention
as the other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we
port over one of the themes instead of two.

Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.


Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com

On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in the
> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>
> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

JulienNicolas
Hello,

I was underwater since 1 month and can't work seriously on bootstrap theme.
But I agree with Adrian, bootstrap basic can be removed and we can keep
focused on Bootstrap Sunrise.

I think that it's still not ready for trunk.

For the old themes, when Sunrise work, I'm quite sure that I'll never
use old ones anymore...
It could be interesting to have theme as addons...

Julien.

Le 23/06/2015 17:20, Adrian Crum a écrit :

> I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> yesterday and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported
> still exist, plus I found another one.
>
> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>
> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
> trunk. The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention
> as the other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest
> we port over one of the themes instead of two.
>
> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>
>
> Adrian Crum
> Sandglass Software
> www.sandglass-software.com
>
> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in
>> the
>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>
>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Jacques Le Roux
Administrator
Le 23/06/2015 17:42, Julien NICOLAS a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> I was underwater since 1 month and can't work seriously on bootstrap theme.
> But I agree with Adrian, bootstrap basic can be removed and we can keep focused on Bootstrap Sunrise.
>
> I think that it's still not ready for trunk.
>
> For the old themes, when Sunrise work, I'm quite sure that I'll never use old ones anymore...
> It could be interesting to have theme as addons...

I'd like to keep at least Flat Grey and Tomahawk for now

Jacques

>
> Julien.
>
> Le 23/06/2015 17:20, Adrian Crum a écrit :
>> I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy yesterday and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
>> plus I found another one.
>>
>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>>
>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the trunk. The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port over one of the themes instead of two.
>>
>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>>
>>
>> Adrian Crum
>> Sandglass Software
>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>
>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in the
>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>>
>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Pierre Smits
In reply to this post by Adrian Crum-3
Hi Adrian,

Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in JIRA
issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap dev
branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration that the
framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater part) on
r1634810.

On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were co-developed.
And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in the
templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the Bootstrap
Basic theme negatively.

Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to go
with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a personal
preference what one likes best.

Best regards,


Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy yesterday
> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist, plus
> I found another one.
>
> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>
> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the trunk.
> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port over
> one of the themes instead of two.
>
> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>
>
> Adrian Crum
> Sandglass Software
> www.sandglass-software.com
>
> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in the
>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>
>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Adrian Crum-3
I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of them.

Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com

On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:

> Hi Adrian,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in JIRA
> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap dev
> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration that the
> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater part) on
> r1634810.
>
> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were co-developed.
> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in the
> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the Bootstrap
> Basic theme negatively.
>
> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to go
> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a personal
> preference what one likes best.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy yesterday
>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist, plus
>> I found another one.
>>
>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>>
>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the trunk.
>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port over
>> one of the themes instead of two.
>>
>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>>
>>
>> Adrian Crum
>> Sandglass Software
>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>
>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in the
>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>>
>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>
>>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Pierre Smits
I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of them.
>
> Adrian Crum
> Sandglass Software
> www.sandglass-software.com
>
> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
>> Hi Adrian,
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in JIRA
>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap dev
>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration that
>> the
>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater part) on
>> r1634810.
>>
>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were co-developed.
>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in the
>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the Bootstrap
>> Basic theme negatively.
>>
>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to go
>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a personal
>> preference what one likes best.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>  I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy yesterday
>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
>>> plus
>>> I found another one.
>>>
>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>>>
>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the trunk.
>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port
>>> over
>>> one of the themes instead of two.
>>>
>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>>>
>>>
>>> Adrian Crum
>>> Sandglass Software
>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>
>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect to
>>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in
>>>> the
>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>>>
>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap Basic
>>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>
>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Gavin Mabie-2
Four issues:


   1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one theme
   with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of Basic).
   Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under bootstrap/css/skins. Other
   than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It is a false
   choice.
   2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a skin),
   then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To qualify as a
   theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation including
   headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
   3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl) affects
   both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and could
   therefore not do reviews.
   4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as possible,
   minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and leaving
   this level of styling up to individual designers.

I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues flagged by
Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor issues
which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced with
r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate header.ftl
& appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise" point
to locations where the new files reside.

Regards

Gavin





On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
> > patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of them.
> >
> > Adrian Crum
> > Sandglass Software
> > www.sandglass-software.com
> >
> > On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Adrian,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in JIRA
> >> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap
> dev
> >> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration that
> >> the
> >> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater part)
> on
> >> r1634810.
> >>
> >> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were co-developed.
> >> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in the
> >> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
> Bootstrap
> >> Basic theme negatively.
> >>
> >> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to go
> >> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a personal
> >> preference what one likes best.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> Pierre Smits
> >>
> >> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >> Services and Retail & Trade
> >> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> >> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>  I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> yesterday
> >>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
> >>> plus
> >>> I found another one.
> >>>
> >>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
> >>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
> >>>
> >>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
> trunk.
> >>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
> >>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port
> >>> over
> >>> one of the themes instead of two.
> >>>
> >>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Adrian Crum
> >>> Sandglass Software
> >>> www.sandglass-software.com
> >>>
> >>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect
> to
> >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
> >>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in
> >>>> the
> >>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> >>>>
> >>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap
> Basic
> >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>
> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Jacques Le Roux
Administrator
Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :

> Four issues:
>
>
>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one theme
>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of Basic).
>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under bootstrap/css/skins. Other
>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It is a false
>     choice.
>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a skin),
>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To qualify as a
>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation including
>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl) affects
>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and could
>     therefore not do reviews.
>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as possible,
>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and leaving
>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
>
> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues flagged by
> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor issues
> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced with
> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate header.ftl
> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise" point
> to locations where the new files reside.

I did not review anything but from your explanation having separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense to me (since it's
a "skin")
BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy of basic, right?

Jacques

>
> Regards
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of them.
>>>
>>> Adrian Crum
>>> Sandglass Software
>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>
>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Adrian,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in JIRA
>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap
>> dev
>>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration that
>>>> the
>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater part)
>> on
>>>> r1634810.
>>>>
>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were co-developed.
>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in the
>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
>> Bootstrap
>>>> Basic theme negatively.
>>>>
>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to go
>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a personal
>>>> preference what one likes best.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>
>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
>> yesterday
>>>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
>>>>> plus
>>>>> I found another one.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
>> trunk.
>>>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port
>>>>> over
>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Adrian Crum
>>>>> Sandglass Software
>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   Hi all,
>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect
>> to
>>>>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap
>> Basic
>>>>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Gavin Mabie-2
>
> I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense
> to me (since it's a "skin")
> BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy
> of basic, right?


That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to new
folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can serve
as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.

I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk sooner
rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New issues will
definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.

Gavin

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
>
>> Four issues:
>>
>>
>>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one
>> theme
>>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of Basic).
>>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under bootstrap/css/skins.
>> Other
>>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It is a
>> false
>>     choice.
>>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a
>> skin),
>>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To qualify
>> as a
>>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation including
>>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
>>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl) affects
>>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and could
>>     therefore not do reviews.
>>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
>> possible,
>>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and
>> leaving
>>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
>>
>> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues flagged
>> by
>> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
>> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
>> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor issues
>> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced
>> with
>> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
>> header.ftl
>> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise" point
>> to locations where the new files reside.
>>
>
> I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense
> to me (since it's a "skin")
> BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy
> of basic, right?
>
> Jacques
>
>
>
>> Regards
>>
>> Gavin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
>>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> Adrian Crum
>>>> Sandglass Software
>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>>
>>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Hi Adrian,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in
>>>>> JIRA
>>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap
>>>>>
>>>> dev
>>>
>>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration that
>>>>> the
>>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater part)
>>>>>
>>>> on
>>>
>>>> r1634810.
>>>>>
>>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
>>>>> co-developed.
>>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in the
>>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
>>>>>
>>>> Bootstrap
>>>
>>>> Basic theme negatively.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to
>>>>> go
>>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
>>>>> personal
>>>>> preference what one likes best.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>
>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
>>>>>
>>>> yesterday
>>>
>>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
>>>>>> plus
>>>>>> I found another one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be fixed
>>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
>>>>>>
>>>>> trunk.
>>>
>>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
>>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we port
>>>>>> over
>>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adrian Crum
>>>>>> Sandglass Software
>>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with respect
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>
>>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
>>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Basic
>>>
>>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Pierre Smits
If we, as a community, are opting for multiple themes in one component,
that would sure fit the bill. But is that what we want? Add complexities
and bulk to a somewhat global theme management component?

Or should we just have a strategy of one theme - one component? I am in
favour of the latter option, even if it means some kind of duplication of
functionality.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:

> >
> > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense
> > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy
> > of basic, right?
>
>
> That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to new
> folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can serve
> as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
>
> I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk sooner
> rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New issues will
> definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
>
> Gavin
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> >
> >> Four issues:
> >>
> >>
> >>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one
> >> theme
> >>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
> Basic).
> >>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under bootstrap/css/skins.
> >> Other
> >>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It is
> a
> >> false
> >>     choice.
> >>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a
> >> skin),
> >>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
> qualify
> >> as a
> >>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
> including
> >>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
> >>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
> affects
> >>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and could
> >>     therefore not do reviews.
> >>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
> >> possible,
> >>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and
> >> leaving
> >>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
> >>
> >> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues flagged
> >> by
> >> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> >> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
> >> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
> issues
> >> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced
> >> with
> >> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
> >> header.ftl
> >> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise"
> point
> >> to locations where the new files reside.
> >>
> >
> > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense
> > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy
> > of basic, right?
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> >
> >
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Gavin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>>
> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
> >>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of
> >>>> them.
> >>>>
> >>>> Adrian Crum
> >>>> Sandglass Software
> >>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> >>>>
> >>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>  Hi Adrian,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in
> >>>>> JIRA
> >>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap
> >>>>>
> >>>> dev
> >>>
> >>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration
> that
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater
> part)
> >>>>>
> >>>> on
> >>>
> >>>> r1634810.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
> >>>>> co-developed.
> >>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in
> the
> >>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
> >>>>>
> >>>> Bootstrap
> >>>
> >>>> Basic theme negatively.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to
> >>>>> go
> >>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
> >>>>> personal
> >>>>> preference what one likes best.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> >>>>>
> >>>> yesterday
> >>>
> >>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
> >>>>>> plus
> >>>>>> I found another one.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be
> fixed
> >>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> trunk.
> >>>
> >>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
> >>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we
> port
> >>>>>> over
> >>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Adrian Crum
> >>>>>> Sandglass Software
> >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
> respect
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> to
> >>>
> >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
> >>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Basic
> >>>
> >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What do you think?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Pierre Smits
In reply to this post by Gavin Mabie-2
Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind of
Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use the
Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was required
to have).

With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial goal.
Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes in
the ftl files for the one on the other.

That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467, and
provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:

> >
> > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense
> > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy
> > of basic, right?
>
>
> That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to new
> folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can serve
> as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
>
> I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk sooner
> rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New issues will
> definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
>
> Gavin
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> >
> >> Four issues:
> >>
> >>
> >>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one
> >> theme
> >>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
> Basic).
> >>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under bootstrap/css/skins.
> >> Other
> >>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It is
> a
> >> false
> >>     choice.
> >>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a
> >> skin),
> >>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
> qualify
> >> as a
> >>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
> including
> >>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
> >>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
> affects
> >>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and could
> >>     therefore not do reviews.
> >>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
> >> possible,
> >>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and
> >> leaving
> >>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
> >>
> >> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues flagged
> >> by
> >> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> >> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
> >> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
> issues
> >> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced
> >> with
> >> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
> >> header.ftl
> >> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise"
> point
> >> to locations where the new files reside.
> >>
> >
> > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes sense
> > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a copy
> > of basic, right?
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> >
> >
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Gavin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Pierre Smits
> >>>
> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there are
> >>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of
> >>>> them.
> >>>>
> >>>> Adrian Crum
> >>>> Sandglass Software
> >>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> >>>>
> >>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>  Hi Adrian,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in
> >>>>> JIRA
> >>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the bootstrap
> >>>>>
> >>>> dev
> >>>
> >>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration
> that
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater
> part)
> >>>>>
> >>>> on
> >>>
> >>>> r1634810.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
> >>>>> co-developed.
> >>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in
> the
> >>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
> >>>>>
> >>>> Bootstrap
> >>>
> >>>> Basic theme negatively.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses to
> >>>>> go
> >>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
> >>>>> personal
> >>>>> preference what one likes best.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> >>>>>
> >>>> yesterday
> >>>
> >>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still exist,
> >>>>>> plus
> >>>>>> I found another one.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be
> fixed
> >>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too many.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> trunk.
> >>>
> >>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as the
> >>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we
> port
> >>>>>> over
> >>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Adrian Crum
> >>>>>> Sandglass Software
> >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
> respect
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> to
> >>>
> >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
> >>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>) and
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the Bootstrap
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Basic
> >>>
> >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What do you think?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Gavin Mabie-2
In reply to this post by Pierre Smits
>
> If we, as a community, are opting for multiple themes in one component,
> that would sure fit the bill. But is that what we want? Add complexities
> and bulk to a somewhat global theme management component?



> Or should we just have a strategy of one theme - one component? I am in
> favour of the latter option, even if it means some kind of duplication of
> functionality.


I am for one basic theme.  Most projects maintain one basic theme and leave
further customization and development up to the design community.  I see
our task as developing and maintaining a solid basic theme.  Maybe that can
spawn a templating community of its own.

Gavin

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> If we, as a community, are opting for multiple themes in one component,
> that would sure fit the bill. But is that what we want? Add complexities
> and bulk to a somewhat global theme management component?
>
> Or should we just have a strategy of one theme - one component? I am in
> favour of the latter option, even if it means some kind of duplication of
> functionality.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> sense
> > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> copy
> > > of basic, right?
> >
> >
> > That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to new
> > folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can
> serve
> > as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
> >
> > I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk sooner
> > rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New issues
> will
> > definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Four issues:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one
> > >> theme
> > >>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
> > Basic).
> > >>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under
> bootstrap/css/skins.
> > >> Other
> > >>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It
> is
> > a
> > >> false
> > >>     choice.
> > >>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a
> > >> skin),
> > >>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
> > qualify
> > >> as a
> > >>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
> > including
> > >>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
> > >>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
> > affects
> > >>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and
> could
> > >>     therefore not do reviews.
> > >>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
> > >> possible,
> > >>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and
> > >> leaving
> > >>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
> > >>
> > >> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues
> flagged
> > >> by
> > >> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> > >> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
> > >> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
> > issues
> > >> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced
> > >> with
> > >> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
> > >> header.ftl
> > >> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise"
> > point
> > >> to locations where the new files reside.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> sense
> > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> copy
> > > of basic, right?
> > >
> > > Jacques
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Regards
> > >>
> > >> Gavin
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <
> [hidden email]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards,
> > >>>
> > >>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>
> > >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > >>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > >>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there
> are
> > >>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of
> > >>>> them.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Adrian Crum
> > >>>> Sandglass Software
> > >>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  Hi Adrian,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in
> > >>>>> JIRA
> > >>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the
> bootstrap
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> dev
> > >>>
> > >>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration
> > that
> > >>>>> the
> > >>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater
> > part)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> on
> > >>>
> > >>>> r1634810.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
> > >>>>> co-developed.
> > >>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in
> > the
> > >>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Bootstrap
> > >>>
> > >>>> Basic theme negatively.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses
> to
> > >>>>> go
> > >>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
> > >>>>> personal
> > >>>>> preference what one likes best.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> yesterday
> > >>>
> > >>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still
> exist,
> > >>>>>> plus
> > >>>>>> I found another one.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be
> > fixed
> > >>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too
> many.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> trunk.
> > >>>
> > >>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as
> the
> > >>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we
> > port
> > >>>>>> over
> > >>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Adrian Crum
> > >>>>>> Sandglass Software
> > >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>   Hi all,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
> > respect
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> to
> > >>>
> > >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
> > >>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>)
> and
> > >>>>>>> in
> > >>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> > >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the
> Bootstrap
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Basic
> > >>>
> > >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> What do you think?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Gavin Mabie-2
In reply to this post by Pierre Smits
Hi Pierre


> Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
> Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind of
> Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use the
> Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was required
> to have).


When I initially included the "Bootstrap Tomahawk" theme,  the purpose was
solely to indicate how easy it would be to develop skins for a theme.
Naturally some might think that it is a "beautification", but that is a
matter of opinion.  In the real world you may find clients who do not agree
with this notion.  It's for this reason that most designers first present a
vanilla look-and-feel so that clients can bring their preferences into the
mix.  As a community our goal should be to present Ofbiz as visually
appealing as possible without being too prescriptive in terms of
look-and-feel.  Most projects do this by using generic (if not bland)
look-and-feel's for their apps.  Hence "Basic".  BTW Bootstrap is not a web
framework!

With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
> Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial goal.
>
>
Going beyond the initial goal is perhaps at the crux of it.  I personally
think it is too early to do this.  There are other, higher priority issues
that need addressing before we get sexy on this. For one, we haven't dealt
with responsiveness sufficiently.  While we have demonstrated that the
Ofbiz framework is flexible enough to handle Bootstrap and perhaps any
other JavaScript framework, we have yet to address HTML 5 issues.

Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes in
> the ftl files for the one on the other.


I don't agree with the idea that these are difficulties.  It is a simple
solution to the problem arising from treating "Sunrise" as a theme.  Also,
it acknowledges the work done by Julien in line with the "People before
Code" mantra.

That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467, and
> provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362


This, I believe, is a complication.  There is nothing complicated about the
recommendation to fork header.ftl and appbar.ftl.  In fact I would like to
see this kind of practice promoted in Ofbiz as it allows designers more
options.

Regards

Gavin



On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
> Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind of
> Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use the
> Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was required
> to have).
>
> With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
> Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial goal.
> Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes in
> the ftl files for the one on the other.
>
> That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467,
> and
> provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> sense
> > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> copy
> > > of basic, right?
> >
> >
> > That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to new
> > folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can
> serve
> > as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
> >
> > I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk sooner
> > rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New issues
> will
> > definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Four issues:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just one
> > >> theme
> > >>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
> > Basic).
> > >>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under
> bootstrap/css/skins.
> > >> Other
> > >>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It
> is
> > a
> > >> false
> > >>     choice.
> > >>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just a
> > >> skin),
> > >>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
> > qualify
> > >> as a
> > >>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
> > including
> > >>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
> > >>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
> > affects
> > >>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and
> could
> > >>     therefore not do reviews.
> > >>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
> > >> possible,
> > >>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel and
> > >> leaving
> > >>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
> > >>
> > >> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues
> flagged
> > >> by
> > >> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> > >> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we revert
> > >> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
> > issues
> > >> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes introduced
> > >> with
> > >> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
> > >> header.ftl
> > >> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise"
> > point
> > >> to locations where the new files reside.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> sense
> > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> copy
> > > of basic, right?
> > >
> > > Jacques
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Regards
> > >>
> > >> Gavin
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <
> [hidden email]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards,
> > >>>
> > >>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>
> > >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > >>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > >>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there
> are
> > >>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware of
> > >>>> them.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Adrian Crum
> > >>>> Sandglass Software
> > >>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  Hi Adrian,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available in
> > >>>>> JIRA
> > >>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the
> bootstrap
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> dev
> > >>>
> > >>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration
> > that
> > >>>>> the
> > >>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater
> > part)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> on
> > >>>
> > >>>> r1634810.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
> > >>>>> co-developed.
> > >>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes in
> > the
> > >>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Bootstrap
> > >>>
> > >>>> Basic theme negatively.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community chooses
> to
> > >>>>> go
> > >>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
> > >>>>> personal
> > >>>>> preference what one likes best.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> yesterday
> > >>>
> > >>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still
> exist,
> > >>>>>> plus
> > >>>>>> I found another one.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be
> > fixed
> > >>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too
> many.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in the
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> trunk.
> > >>>
> > >>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as
> the
> > >>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we
> > port
> > >>>>>> over
> > >>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Adrian Crum
> > >>>>>> Sandglass Software
> > >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>   Hi all,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
> > respect
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> to
> > >>>
> > >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from framework (
> > >>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>)
> and
> > >>>>>>> in
> > >>>>>>> the
> > >>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> > >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the
> Bootstrap
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Basic
> > >>>
> > >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> What do you think?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Pierre Smits
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Pierre Smits
Gavin,

Please don't see my posting as an attack on anyone participating in the
branch. It is just a reflection of my observation infused with a viewpoint.
I appreciate what has been done.

And, how to do skin variants has popped up before in relation to ecommerce.
See various mail threads in devML. So, the effort applied and the result
achieved validate the added goal of the Bootstrap PoC.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Pierre
>
>
> > Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
> > Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind of
> > Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use the
> > Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was required
> > to have).
>
>
> When I initially included the "Bootstrap Tomahawk" theme,  the purpose was
> solely to indicate how easy it would be to develop skins for a theme.
> Naturally some might think that it is a "beautification", but that is a
> matter of opinion.  In the real world you may find clients who do not agree
> with this notion.  It's for this reason that most designers first present a
> vanilla look-and-feel so that clients can bring their preferences into the
> mix.  As a community our goal should be to present Ofbiz as visually
> appealing as possible without being too prescriptive in terms of
> look-and-feel.  Most projects do this by using generic (if not bland)
> look-and-feel's for their apps.  Hence "Basic".  BTW Bootstrap is not a web
> framework!
>
> With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
> > Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial goal.
> >
> >
> Going beyond the initial goal is perhaps at the crux of it.  I personally
> think it is too early to do this.  There are other, higher priority issues
> that need addressing before we get sexy on this. For one, we haven't dealt
> with responsiveness sufficiently.  While we have demonstrated that the
> Ofbiz framework is flexible enough to handle Bootstrap and perhaps any
> other JavaScript framework, we have yet to address HTML 5 issues.
>
> Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes in
> > the ftl files for the one on the other.
>
>
> I don't agree with the idea that these are difficulties.  It is a simple
> solution to the problem arising from treating "Sunrise" as a theme.  Also,
> it acknowledges the work done by Julien in line with the "People before
> Code" mantra.
>
> That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467,
> and
> > provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
>
>
> This, I believe, is a complication.  There is nothing complicated about the
> recommendation to fork header.ftl and appbar.ftl.  In fact I would like to
> see this kind of practice promoted in Ofbiz as it allows designers more
> options.
>
> Regards
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
> > Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind of
> > Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use the
> > Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was required
> > to have).
> >
> > With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
> > Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial goal.
> > Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes
> in
> > the ftl files for the one on the other.
> >
> > That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467,
> > and
> > provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > Services and Retail & Trade
> > http://www.orrtiz.com
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> > sense
> > > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> > copy
> > > > of basic, right?
> > >
> > >
> > > That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to new
> > > folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can
> > serve
> > > as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
> > >
> > > I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk
> sooner
> > > rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New issues
> > will
> > > definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
> > >
> > > Gavin
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > > >
> > > >> Four issues:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just
> one
> > > >> theme
> > > >>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
> > > Basic).
> > > >>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under
> > bootstrap/css/skins.
> > > >> Other
> > > >>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic. It
> > is
> > > a
> > > >> false
> > > >>     choice.
> > > >>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not just
> a
> > > >> skin),
> > > >>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
> > > qualify
> > > >> as a
> > > >>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
> > > including
> > > >>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
> > > >>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
> > > affects
> > > >>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and
> > could
> > > >>     therefore not do reviews.
> > > >>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
> > > >> possible,
> > > >>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel
> and
> > > >> leaving
> > > >>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
> > > >>
> > > >> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues
> > flagged
> > > >> by
> > > >> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> > > >> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we
> revert
> > > >> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
> > > issues
> > > >> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes
> introduced
> > > >> with
> > > >> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
> > > >> header.ftl
> > > >> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in "Sunrise"
> > > point
> > > >> to locations where the new files reside.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> > sense
> > > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> > copy
> > > > of basic, right?
> > > >
> > > > Jacques
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> Regards
> > > >>
> > > >> Gavin
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against trunk.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Best regards,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Pierre Smits
> > > >>>
> > > >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > >>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > > >>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > > >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If there
> > are
> > > >>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware
> of
> > > >>>> them.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Adrian Crum
> > > >>>> Sandglass Software
> > > >>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>  Hi Adrian,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files available
> in
> > > >>>>> JIRA
> > > >>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the
> > bootstrap
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> dev
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in consideration
> > > that
> > > >>>>> the
> > > >>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the greater
> > > part)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> on
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> r1634810.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
> > > >>>>> co-developed.
> > > >>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes changes
> in
> > > the
> > > >>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected the
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> Bootstrap
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Basic theme negatively.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community
> chooses
> > to
> > > >>>>> go
> > > >>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
> > > >>>>> personal
> > > >>>>> preference what one likes best.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Pierre Smits
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > > >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > > >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local copy
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> yesterday
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still
> > exist,
> > > >>>>>> plus
> > > >>>>>> I found another one.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can be
> > > fixed
> > > >>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too
> > many.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in
> the
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> trunk.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention as
> > the
> > > >>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest we
> > > port
> > > >>>>>> over
> > > >>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Adrian Crum
> > > >>>>>> Sandglass Software
> > > >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>   Hi all,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
> > > respect
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> to
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from
> framework (
> > > >>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362>)
> > and
> > > >>>>>>> in
> > > >>>>>>> the
> > > >>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> > > >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the
> > Bootstrap
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Basic
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> What do you think?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Pierre Smits
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > > >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

Gavin Mabie-2
Hi Pierre

No offense taken.  I would like to hear from Julien on this issue so we can
move it forward.

Gavin

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Gavin,
>
> Please don't see my posting as an attack on anyone participating in the
> branch. It is just a reflection of my observation infused with a viewpoint.
> I appreciate what has been done.
>
> And, how to do skin variants has popped up before in relation to ecommerce.
> See various mail threads in devML. So, the effort applied and the result
> achieved validate the added goal of the Bootstrap PoC.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Pierre
> >
> >
> > > Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
> > > Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind
> of
> > > Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use
> the
> > > Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was
> required
> > > to have).
> >
> >
> > When I initially included the "Bootstrap Tomahawk" theme,  the purpose
> was
> > solely to indicate how easy it would be to develop skins for a theme.
> > Naturally some might think that it is a "beautification", but that is a
> > matter of opinion.  In the real world you may find clients who do not
> agree
> > with this notion.  It's for this reason that most designers first
> present a
> > vanilla look-and-feel so that clients can bring their preferences into
> the
> > mix.  As a community our goal should be to present Ofbiz as visually
> > appealing as possible without being too prescriptive in terms of
> > look-and-feel.  Most projects do this by using generic (if not bland)
> > look-and-feel's for their apps.  Hence "Basic".  BTW Bootstrap is not a
> web
> > framework!
> >
> > With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
> > > Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial
> goal.
> > >
> > >
> > Going beyond the initial goal is perhaps at the crux of it.  I personally
> > think it is too early to do this.  There are other, higher priority
> issues
> > that need addressing before we get sexy on this. For one, we haven't
> dealt
> > with responsiveness sufficiently.  While we have demonstrated that the
> > Ofbiz framework is flexible enough to handle Bootstrap and perhaps any
> > other JavaScript framework, we have yet to address HTML 5 issues.
> >
> > Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes
> in
> > > the ftl files for the one on the other.
> >
> >
> > I don't agree with the idea that these are difficulties.  It is a simple
> > solution to the problem arising from treating "Sunrise" as a theme.
> Also,
> > it acknowledges the work done by Julien in line with the "People before
> > Code" mantra.
> >
> > That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467,
> > and
> > > provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
> >
> >
> > This, I believe, is a complication.  There is nothing complicated about
> the
> > recommendation to fork header.ftl and appbar.ftl.  In fact I would like
> to
> > see this kind of practice promoted in Ofbiz as it allows designers more
> > options.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
> > > Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind
> of
> > > Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use
> the
> > > Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was
> required
> > > to have).
> > >
> > > With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
> > > Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial
> goal.
> > > Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of
> changes
> > in
> > > the ftl files for the one on the other.
> > >
> > > That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467
> ,
> > > and
> > > provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Pierre Smits
> > >
> > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > Services and Retail & Trade
> > > http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> > > sense
> > > > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> > > copy
> > > > > of basic, right?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to
> new
> > > > folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can
> > > serve
> > > > as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk
> > sooner
> > > > rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New
> issues
> > > will
> > > > definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
> > > >
> > > > Gavin
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > >> Four issues:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just
> > one
> > > > >> theme
> > > > >>     with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
> > > > Basic).
> > > > >>     Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under
> > > bootstrap/css/skins.
> > > > >> Other
> > > > >>     than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic.
> It
> > > is
> > > > a
> > > > >> false
> > > > >>     choice.
> > > > >>     2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not
> just
> > a
> > > > >> skin),
> > > > >>     then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
> > > > qualify
> > > > >> as a
> > > > >>     theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
> > > > including
> > > > >>     headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
> > > > >>     3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
> > > > affects
> > > > >>     both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and
> > > could
> > > > >>     therefore not do reviews.
> > > > >>     4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
> > > > >> possible,
> > > > >>     minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel
> > and
> > > > >> leaving
> > > > >>     this level of styling up to individual designers.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues
> > > flagged
> > > > >> by
> > > > >> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
> > > > >> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we
> > revert
> > > > >> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
> > > > issues
> > > > >> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes
> > introduced
> > > > >> with
> > > > >> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
> > > > >> header.ftl
> > > > >> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in
> "Sunrise"
> > > > point
> > > > >> to locations where the new files reside.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > I did not review anything but from your explanation having
> > > > > separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
> > > sense
> > > > > to me (since it's a "skin")
> > > > > BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
> > > copy
> > > > > of basic, right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Jacques
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> Regards
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Gavin
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against
> trunk.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Pierre Smits
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > > >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > > >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > > >>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > > > >>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > > > >>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>  I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If
> there
> > > are
> > > > >>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware
> > of
> > > > >>>> them.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Adrian Crum
> > > > >>>> Sandglass Software
> > > > >>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>  Hi Adrian,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files
> available
> > in
> > > > >>>>> JIRA
> > > > >>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the
> > > bootstrap
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>> dev
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in
> consideration
> > > > that
> > > > >>>>> the
> > > > >>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the
> greater
> > > > part)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>> on
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> r1634810.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
> > > > >>>>> co-developed.
> > > > >>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes
> changes
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > >>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected
> the
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>> Bootstrap
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Basic theme negatively.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community
> > chooses
> > > to
> > > > >>>>> go
> > > > >>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
> > > > >>>>> personal
> > > > >>>>> preference what one likes best.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Pierre Smits
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > > >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > > >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > > >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > > > >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
> > > > >>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>   I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local
> copy
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>> yesterday
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still
> > > exist,
> > > > >>>>>> plus
> > > > >>>>>> I found another one.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can
> be
> > > > fixed
> > > > >>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too
> > > many.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in
> > the
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>> trunk.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention
> as
> > > the
> > > > >>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest
> we
> > > > port
> > > > >>>>>> over
> > > > >>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Adrian Crum
> > > > >>>>>> Sandglass Software
> > > > >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>   Hi all,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
> > > > respect
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> to
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from
> > framework (
> > > > >>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
> >)
> > > and
> > > > >>>>>>> in
> > > > >>>>>>> the
> > > > >>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
> > > > >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the
> > > Bootstrap
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Basic
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> What do you think?
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Pierre Smits
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > > >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > > >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > > >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
> > > > >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bootstrap Themes - is it trunk ready?

JulienNicolas
Hello,

Sorry for the sunrise modifications, I wasn't aware about the basic
theme... Then I broke it a little...
I think that it could be a good thing to push the bootstrap effort in
the trunk. As far as the old themes are working, it's not a problem to
have it in the trunk :)
Moving sunrise specific source code is not a problem. Then basic theme
will works again.

Julien.


Le 24/06/2015 16:12, Gavin Mabie a écrit :

> Hi Pierre
>
> No offense taken.  I would like to hear from Julien on this issue so we can
> move it forward.
>
> Gavin
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Gavin,
>>
>> Please don't see my posting as an attack on anyone participating in the
>> branch. It is just a reflection of my observation infused with a viewpoint.
>> I appreciate what has been done.
>>
>> And, how to do skin variants has popped up before in relation to ecommerce.
>> See various mail threads in devML. So, the effort applied and the result
>> achieved validate the added goal of the Bootstrap PoC.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pierre
>>>
>>>
>>>> Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
>>>> Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind
>> of
>>>> Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use
>> the
>>>> Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was
>> required
>>>> to have).
>>>
>>> When I initially included the "Bootstrap Tomahawk" theme,  the purpose
>> was
>>> solely to indicate how easy it would be to develop skins for a theme.
>>> Naturally some might think that it is a "beautification", but that is a
>>> matter of opinion.  In the real world you may find clients who do not
>> agree
>>> with this notion.  It's for this reason that most designers first
>> present a
>>> vanilla look-and-feel so that clients can bring their preferences into
>> the
>>> mix.  As a community our goal should be to present Ofbiz as visually
>>> appealing as possible without being too prescriptive in terms of
>>> look-and-feel.  Most projects do this by using generic (if not bland)
>>> look-and-feel's for their apps.  Hence "Basic".  BTW Bootstrap is not a
>> web
>>> framework!
>>>
>>> With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
>>>> Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial
>> goal.
>>>>
>>> Going beyond the initial goal is perhaps at the crux of it.  I personally
>>> think it is too early to do this.  There are other, higher priority
>> issues
>>> that need addressing before we get sexy on this. For one, we haven't
>> dealt
>>> with responsiveness sufficiently.  While we have demonstrated that the
>>> Ofbiz framework is flexible enough to handle Bootstrap and perhaps any
>>> other JavaScript framework, we have yet to address HTML 5 issues.
>>>
>>> Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of changes
>> in
>>>> the ftl files for the one on the other.
>>>
>>> I don't agree with the idea that these are difficulties.  It is a simple
>>> solution to the problem arising from treating "Sunrise" as a theme.
>> Also,
>>> it acknowledges the work done by Julien in line with the "People before
>>> Code" mantra.
>>>
>>> That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467,
>>> and
>>>> provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
>>>
>>> This, I believe, is a complication.  There is nothing complicated about
>> the
>>> recommendation to fork header.ftl and appbar.ftl.  In fact I would like
>> to
>>> see this kind of practice promoted in Ofbiz as it allows designers more
>>> options.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Gavin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bootstrap Sunrise is, in effect, a beautification effort on top of
>>>> Bootstrap Basic. Where the Bootstrap dev branch started out as a kind
>> of
>>>> Proof of Concept branch (proving that OFBiz could be leveraged to use
>> the
>>>> Bootstrap web framework, and investigating/implementing what was
>> required
>>>> to have).
>>>>
>>>> With the effort spent on the additional skin (started as bootstrapped
>>>> Tomahawk variant, now dubbed Sunrise), we went beyond that initial
>> goal.
>>>> Yet introducing another set of difficulties, being the effect of
>> changes
>>> in
>>>> the ftl files for the one on the other.
>>>>
>>>> That is why I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6467
>> ,
>>>> and
>>>> provided patches for the two disentangled themes in
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>
>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Gavin Mabie <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I did not review anything but from your explanation having
>>>>>> separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
>>>> sense
>>>>>> to me (since it's a "skin")
>>>>>> BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
>>>> copy
>>>>>> of basic, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's right.  If Julien is okay with it, I can move his commits to
>> new
>>>>> folder "sunrise" under bootstrap/includes.  The "sunrise" folder can
>>>> serve
>>>>> as placeholder for templates that deviate from the "basic" templates.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with Pierre that we should try to get this into the trunk
>>> sooner
>>>>> rather then later because of the massive refactoring work.  New
>> issues
>>>> will
>>>>> definitely emerge once in the trunk, but we can deal with that there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 24/06/2015 11:47, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Four issues:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      1. The Bootstrap Basic and "Bootstrap Sunrise" is in fact just
>>> one
>>>>>>> theme
>>>>>>>      with Basic as theme and Sunrise as a "skin" (implementation of
>>>>> Basic).
>>>>>>>      Hence the location of the css for Sunrise under
>>>> bootstrap/css/skins.
>>>>>>> Other
>>>>>>>      than that, Sunrise uses the same template libraries as Basic.
>> It
>>>> is
>>>>> a
>>>>>>> false
>>>>>>>      choice.
>>>>>>>      2.  If we want to elevate Sunrise to theme status (i.e not
>> just
>>> a
>>>>>>> skin),
>>>>>>>      then we have to create separate template libraries for it. To
>>>>> qualify
>>>>>>> as a
>>>>>>>      theme, it should have its own distinct widget implementation
>>>>> including
>>>>>>>      headers, menus, forms, tables, pagination etc.
>>>>>>>      3. The commits by Julien - r1683430 (header.ftl & appbar.ftl)
>>>>> affects
>>>>>>>      both Basic and Sunrise. I have not seen patches for these and
>>>> could
>>>>>>>      therefore not do reviews.
>>>>>>>      4. The approach with the Basic theme is to keep it as basic as
>>>>>>> possible,
>>>>>>>      minimizing personal preferences with regards to look-and-feel
>>> and
>>>>>>> leaving
>>>>>>>      this level of styling up to individual designers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have committed patches to deal with most if not all the issues
>>>> flagged
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> Adrian on 19 May 2015.  New issues have cropped up as a result of
>>>>>>> r1683430.  To get this merge-ready my recommendation is that we
>>> revert
>>>>>>> r1683430 which deals with header.ftl & appbar.ft.  These are minor
>>>>> issues
>>>>>>> which relate mainly to personal preferences. If the changes
>>> introduced
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> r1683430 is absolutely necessary, then I recommend that separate
>>>>>>> header.ftl
>>>>>>> & appbar.ftl files are created and that themeResources in
>> "Sunrise"
>>>>> point
>>>>>>> to locations where the new files reside.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not review anything but from your explanation having
>>>>>> separated/specific header.ftl & appbar.ftl files in "Sunrise" makes
>>>> sense
>>>>>> to me (since it's a "skin")
>>>>>> BTW I understand that <<Sunrise is a "skin">> because it's mostly a
>>>> copy
>>>>>> of basic, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gavin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Pierre Smits <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   I am running the Bootstrap Basic (somewhat modified) against
>> trunk.
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum <
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   I evaluated the bootstrap branch as it currently exists. If
>> there
>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> patches waiting to be applied to the branch, then I am not aware
>>> of
>>>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Adrian Crum
>>>>>>>>> Sandglass Software
>>>>>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2015 12:43 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   Hi Adrian,
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the feedback. That the existing patch files
>> available
>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> JIRA
>>>>>>>>>> issues don't work in trunk has to do with the fact that the
>>>> bootstrap
>>>>>>>>> dev
>>>>>>>>> branch is not in sync with trunk. We have to take in
>> consideration
>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> framework stack of the bootstrap branch is based (for the
>> greater
>>>>> part)
>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> r1634810.
>>>>>>>>>> On top of that, the Bootstrap Basic and the other one were
>>>>>>>>>> co-developed.
>>>>>>>>>> And shortly before the disentanglement of the two themes
>> changes
>>> in
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> templates were implemented for the other theme that affected
>> the
>>>>>>>>> Bootstrap
>>>>>>>>> Basic theme negatively.
>>>>>>>>>> Nonetheless, I am ok with whatever which way the community
>>> chooses
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> go
>>>>>>>>>> with these bootstrap themes and the ones in trunk. It remains a
>>>>>>>>>> personal
>>>>>>>>>> preference what one likes best.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Adrian Crum <
>>>>>>>>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    I don't think the new themes are ready. I updated my local
>> copy
>>>>>>>>> yesterday
>>>>>>>>> and tried them out - many of the layout issues I reported still
>>>> exist,
>>>>>>>>>>> plus
>>>>>>>>>>> I found another one.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't mind if there are just a few minor quirks - those can
>> be
>>>>> fixed
>>>>>>>>>>> after the themes are in the trunk, but right now there are too
>>>> many.
>>>>>>>>>>> Also, we need to discuss how many themes we want to include in
>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> trunk.
>>>>>>>>> The Bootstrap Basic theme doesn't seem to get as much attention
>> as
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> other one, and it shows - its layout is much worse. I suggest
>> we
>>>>> port
>>>>>>>>>>> over
>>>>>>>>>>> one of the themes instead of two.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Also, it would be nice to drop one or two existing themes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Adrian Crum
>>>>>>>>>>> Sandglass Software
>>>>>>>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/23/2015 2:08 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>    Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Recently we have seen that great strides have been made with
>>>>> respect
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> widget refactoring, theme functions disentanglement from
>>> framework (
>>>>>>>>>>>> OFBIZ-6362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-6362
>>> )
>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bootstrap dev branch (OFBIZ-5840
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5840>).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Based on this all I am inclined to believe that both the
>>>> Bootstrap
>>>>>>>>>>> Basic
>>>>>>>>> and the Bootstrap Sunrise themes are trunk ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>>>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>>>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>>>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>