Moving config properties from base/src to base/config

[Jacopo Cappellato-3]

What about moving the config properties that are under src/base to the  
base/config folder?
In my opinion it is counter intuitive to search for them under the src  
folder.
Most important: you have to recompile the base component after you  
edit them.
I guess there are some technical reasons for doing this, probably  
becayse the config files need to be included into the ofbiz.jar file:  
but maybe we may try to create a new ant task that just recreate the  
ofbiz.jar file without recompiling the sources by copying the config  
files from the config folder; and we could name the new task with a  
seft explanatory name, for example "deploy-config-files"

I know this is not a big issue but IMO it is important to fix these  
small details before the framework release.

What do you think?

Jacopo

[Ashish Vijaywargiya]

+1

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> What about moving the config properties that are under src/base to the
> base/config folder?
> In my opinion it is counter intuitive to search for them under the src
> folder.
> Most important: you have to recompile the base component after you edit
> them.
> I guess there are some technical reasons for doing this, probably becayse
> the config files need to be included into the ofbiz.jar file: but maybe we
> may try to create a new ant task that just recreate the  ofbiz.jar file
> without recompiling the sources by copying the config files from the config
> folder; and we could name the new task with a seft explanatory name, for
> example "deploy-config-files"
>
> I know this is not a big issue but IMO it is important to fix these small
> details before the framework release.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Jacopo
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques

From: "Ashish Vijaywargiya" <[hidden email]>

> +1
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Jacopo Cappellato <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> What about moving the config properties that are under src/base to the
>> base/config folder?
>> In my opinion it is counter intuitive to search for them under the src
>> folder.
>> Most important: you have to recompile the base component after you edit
>> them.
>> I guess there are some technical reasons for doing this, probably becayse
>> the config files need to be included into the ofbiz.jar file: but maybe we
>> may try to create a new ant task that just recreate the  ofbiz.jar file
>> without recompiling the sources by copying the config files from the config
>> folder; and we could name the new task with a seft explanatory name, for
>> example "deploy-config-files"
>>
>> I know this is not a big issue but IMO it is important to fix these small
>> details before the framework release.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>>
>

[David E Jones]

Only the ones under src/start directory need to be in the ofbiz.jar  
file.

While we could move those to the config directory, they would need to  
go in a sub-directory or something so we would know which ones to copy  
into the jar file.

Of course, for the ones below the src/start directory what would we  
gain by moving them? We still couldn't change them without rebuilding  
the jar... and it would mean looking in two places for the stuff in  
that jar file instead of one...

-David


On Jun 24, 2008, at 8:23 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> What about moving the config properties that are under src/base to  
> the base/config folder?
> In my opinion it is counter intuitive to search for them under the  
> src folder.
> Most important: you have to recompile the base component after you  
> edit them.
> I guess there are some technical reasons for doing this, probably  
> becayse the config files need to be included into the ofbiz.jar  
> file: but maybe we may try to create a new ant task that just  
> recreate the  ofbiz.jar file without recompiling the sources by  
> copying the config files from the config folder; and we could name  
> the new task with a seft explanatory name, for example "deploy-
> config-files"
>
> I know this is not a big issue but IMO it is important to fix these  
> small details before the framework release.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Jacopo
>