Re: svn commit: r1760325 - /ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:37 AM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Author: jleroux
> Date: Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
> New Revision: 1760325
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760325&view=rev
> Log:
> Fixes: a bug introduced with one of
> (OFBIZ-8118)(OFBIZ-8122)(OFBIZ-8123)(OFBIZ-8124)(OFBIZ-
> 8125)(OFBIZ-8126)(OFBIZ-8127)(OFBIZ-8128)(OFBIZ-8129)
>
> I put the parenthesis here just because I copied from r1760059. In other
> cases I'll not except if it's *really* needed. I don't see why a simple
> space between Jira issues numbers would not be better, or not parenthesis
> at all for a sole issue. Is it for parsing and then why?
>
>

Jacques, commit logs are not appropriate for discussions or questions about
the format of commit logs; please use an appropriate thread in the dev list
for such discussions, otherwise you will make the project's commit history
unclear and confusing.

Jacopo

[Michael Brohl-3]

Jacques,

the parenthesis comes from our blog post format where we put the JIRA
issue reference just behind the title (you know it because we are
working together on this every month).

Of course, we can parse without the parenthesis and set them when we
generate the development details. But again, we already agreed upon this
format and I don't see a big effort for a committer to put parenthesis
around the Jira issue.

The above example is an exception when it comes to effort. We normally
have one JIRA reference in the commit messages.

When I count the time we already spent discussing these nitpicking
details, you could have written a whole bunch of correct commit messages
in this time. You are making it very hard to establish such a simple
guideline.

Thanks for your support,

Michael

Am 12.09.16 um 11:37 schrieb [hidden email]:

> Author: jleroux
> Date: Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
> New Revision: 1760325
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760325&view=rev
> Log:
> Fixes: a bug introduced with one of
> (OFBIZ-8118)(OFBIZ-8122)(OFBIZ-8123)(OFBIZ-8124)(OFBIZ-8125)(OFBIZ-8126)(OFBIZ-8127)(OFBIZ-8128)(OFBIZ-8129)
>
> I put the parenthesis here just because I copied from r1760059. In other cases I'll not except if it's *really* needed. I don't see why a simple space between Jira issues numbers would not be better, or not parenthesis at all for a sole issue. Is it for parsing and then why?
>
> Modified:
>      ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
>
> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml?rev=1760325&r1=1760324&r2=1760325&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml (original)
> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
> @@ -156,8 +156,8 @@
>                   <set field="partyId" from-field="parameters.partyId"/>
>               </actions>
>               <widgets>
> -                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="newPartyIdentification" id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
> -                    <include-menu name="newPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
> +                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="NewPartyIdentification" id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
> +                    <include-menu name="NewPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
>                       <include-form name="listPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyForms.xml"/>
>                   </screenlet>
>               </widgets>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Michael,

Le 12/09/2016 à 14:30, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> Jacques,
>
> the parenthesis comes from our blog post format where we put the JIRA issue reference just behind the title (you know it because we are working
> together on this every month).

Sorry, I did not notice this aspect. Do we really need parenthesis there, what does it add. A simple list separated by spaces would not be enough? It
seems it would even easier to read to me.

>
> Of course, we can parse without the parenthesis and set them when we generate the development details. But again, we already agreed upon this format
> and I don't see a big effort for a committer to put parenthesis around the Jira issue.

Sorry, I see a big difference with commits like the one below!

>
> The above example is an exception when it comes to effort. We normally have one JIRA reference in the commit messages.
>
> When I count the time we already spent discussing these nitpicking details, you could have written a whole bunch of correct commit messages in this
> time. You are making it very hard to establish such a simple guideline.

Again, I really don't see the need for the parenthesis. And I'd be happy to change that myself once in wiki and elsewhere it's needed rather than have
to type it every time I commit (yes I commit a lot :p)

Jacques

>
> Thanks for your support,
>
> Michael
>
> Am 12.09.16 um 11:37 schrieb [hidden email]:
>> Author: jleroux
>> Date: Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
>> New Revision: 1760325
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760325&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Fixes: a bug introduced with one of
>> (OFBIZ-8118)(OFBIZ-8122)(OFBIZ-8123)(OFBIZ-8124)(OFBIZ-8125)(OFBIZ-8126)(OFBIZ-8127)(OFBIZ-8128)(OFBIZ-8129)
>>
>> I put the parenthesis here just because I copied from r1760059. In other cases I'll not except if it's *really* needed. I don't see why a simple
>> space between Jira issues numbers would not be better, or not parenthesis at all for a sole issue. Is it for parsing and then why?
>>
>> Modified:
>> ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
>>
>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml?rev=1760325&r1=1760324&r2=1760325&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml (original)
>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
>> @@ -156,8 +156,8 @@
>>                   <set field="partyId" from-field="parameters.partyId"/>
>>               </actions>
>>               <widgets>
>> -                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="newPartyIdentification"
>> id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
>> -                    <include-menu name="newPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
>> +                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="NewPartyIdentification"
>> id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
>> +                    <include-menu name="NewPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
>>                       <include-form name="listPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyForms.xml"/>
>>                   </screenlet>
>>               </widgets>
>>
>>
>
>

[Gil Portenseigne]

Hi Jacques, all,

From my experience, having a commit concerning lots of different JIRA is rare.

In this case, don't you think that the list of JIRA could not be in the detail section and written in a more simple way OFBIZ-8118, OFBIZ-8122, OFBIZ-8123, etc.

Indeed, in the commit message template, the Jira in parenthesis represents the bug/improvement/new feature ticket, in that case no Jira have been registered describing the specific bug you fixed (which is not a problem), Having a Jira is not mandatory...

Then this kind of commit message could be like (very simple one :) ):

Fixes: Fix wrong menu name of NewPartyIdentification in XXXX screens

This bug has been introduced with one of OFBIZ-8118, OFBIZ-8122, OFBIZ-8123, OFBIZ-8124, OFBIZ-8125, OFBIZ-8126, OFBIZ-8127, OFBIZ-8128, OFBIZ-8129

WDYT ?

Gil

Le 12/09/2016 à 15:51, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

Michael,

Le 12/09/2016 à 14:30, Michael Brohl a écrit :

Jacques,

the parenthesis comes from our blog post format where we put the JIRA issue reference just behind the title (you know it because we are working together on this every month).

Sorry, I did not notice this aspect. Do we really need parenthesis there, what does it add. A simple list separated by spaces would not be enough? It seems it would even easier to read to me.

Of course, we can parse without the parenthesis and set them when we generate the development details. But again, we already agreed upon this format and I don't see a big effort for a committer to put parenthesis around the Jira issue.

Sorry, I see a big difference with commits like the one below!

The above example is an exception when it comes to effort. We normally have one JIRA reference in the commit messages.

When I count the time we already spent discussing these nitpicking details, you could have written a whole bunch of correct commit messages in this time. You are making it very hard to establish such a simple guideline.

Again, I really don't see the need for the parenthesis. And I'd be happy to change that myself once in wiki and elsewhere it's needed rather than have to type it every time I commit (yes I commit a lot :p)

Jacques

Thanks for your support,

Michael

Am 12.09.16 um 11:37 schrieb [hidden email]:

Author: jleroux
Date: Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
New Revision: 1760325

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760325&view=rev
Log:
Fixes: a bug introduced with one of
(OFBIZ-8118)(OFBIZ-8122)(OFBIZ-8123)(OFBIZ-8124)(OFBIZ-8125)(OFBIZ-8126)(OFBIZ-8127)(OFBIZ-8128)(OFBIZ-8129)

I put the parenthesis here just because I copied from r1760059. In other cases I'll not except if it's *really* needed. I don't see why a simple space between Jira issues numbers would not be better, or not parenthesis at all for a sole issue. Is it for parsing and then why?

Modified:
ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml

Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml?rev=1760325&r1=1760324&r2=1760325&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml (original)
+++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
@@ -156,8 +156,8 @@
                  <set field="partyId" from-field="parameters.partyId"/>
              </actions>
              <widgets>
-                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="newPartyIdentification" id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
-                    <include-menu name="newPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
+                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="NewPartyIdentification" id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
+                    <include-menu name="NewPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
                      <include-form name="listPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyForms.xml"/>
                  </screenlet>
              </widgets>

[Gil Portenseigne]

And moreover, Fixed over Fixes :)

Le 12/09/2016 à 16:15, gil portenseigne a écrit :

Fixes: Fix wrong menu name of NewPartyIdentification in XXXX screens

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 16:16, gil portenseigne a écrit :
>
> And moreover, Fixed over Fixes :)
>
>
> Le 12/09/2016 à 16:15, gil portenseigne a écrit :
>> Fixes: Fix wrong menu name of NewPartyIdentification in XXXX screens
>
Sorry I will stick with Fixes, at the moment I commit it's not yet fixed :p

Jacques

[Jacques Le Roux]

I don't see the value of adding parenthesis everywhere. Remember this will stay forever in the project rules, except if someone has the guts to say
no. Why would I want parenthesis there? Tell me!

Jacques

Le 12/09/2016 à 16:15, gil portenseigne a écrit :

>
> Hi Jacques, all,
>
> From my experience, having a commit concerning lots of different JIRA is rare.
>
> In this case, don't you thinkthat the list of JIRAcould not be in the detail sectionand written in a more simple way OFBIZ-8118, OFBIZ-8122,
> OFBIZ-8123, etc.
>
> Indeed, in the commit message template, the Jira in parenthesis represents the bug/improvement/new feature ticket, in that case no Jira have been
> registered describing the specific bug you fixed (which is not a problem), Having a Jira is not mandatory...
>
> Then this kind of commit message could be like (very simple one :) ):
>
>
> Fixes: Fix wrong menu name of NewPartyIdentification in XXXX screens
>
> This bug has been introduced with one of OFBIZ-8118, OFBIZ-8122, OFBIZ-8123, OFBIZ-8124, OFBIZ-8125, OFBIZ-8126, OFBIZ-8127, OFBIZ-8128, OFBIZ-8129
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Gil
>
>
> Le 12/09/2016 à 15:51, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> Michael,
>>
>> Le 12/09/2016 à 14:30, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>> Jacques,
>>>
>>> the parenthesis comes from our blog post format where we put the JIRA issue reference just behind the title (you know it because we are working
>>> together on this every month).
>>
>> Sorry, I did not notice this aspect. Do we really need parenthesis there, what does it add. A simple list separated by spaces would not be enough?
>> It seems it would even easier to read to me.
>>
>>>
>>> Of course, we can parse without the parenthesis and set them when we generate the development details. But again, we already agreed upon this
>>> format and I don't see a big effort for a committer to put parenthesis around the Jira issue.
>>
>> Sorry, I see a big difference with commits like the one below!
>>
>>>
>>> The above example is an exception when it comes to effort. We normally have one JIRA reference in the commit messages.
>>>
>>> When I count the time we already spent discussing these nitpicking details, you could have written a whole bunch of correct commit messages in
>>> this time. You are making it very hard to establish such a simple guideline.
>>
>> Again, I really don't see the need for the parenthesis. And I'd be happy to change that myself once in wiki and elsewhere it's needed rather than
>> have to type it every time I commit (yes I commit a lot :p)
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for your support,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> Am 12.09.16 um 11:37 schrieb [hidden email]:
>>>> Author: jleroux
>>>> Date: Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
>>>> New Revision: 1760325
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760325&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> Fixes: a bug introduced with one of
>>>> (OFBIZ-8118)(OFBIZ-8122)(OFBIZ-8123)(OFBIZ-8124)(OFBIZ-8125)(OFBIZ-8126)(OFBIZ-8127)(OFBIZ-8128)(OFBIZ-8129)
>>>>
>>>> I put the parenthesis here just because I copied from r1760059. In other cases I'll not except if it's *really* needed. I don't see why a simple
>>>> space between Jira issues numbers would not be better, or not parenthesis at all for a sole issue. Is it for parsing and then why?
>>>>
>>>> Modified:
>>>> ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
>>>>
>>>> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml?rev=1760325&r1=1760324&r2=1760325&view=diff
>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>> --- ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml (original)
>>>> +++ ofbiz/trunk/applications/party/widget/partymgr/ProfileScreens.xml Mon Sep 12 09:37:11 2016
>>>> @@ -156,8 +156,8 @@
>>>>                   <set field="partyId" from-field="parameters.partyId"/>
>>>>               </actions>
>>>>               <widgets>
>>>> -                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="newPartyIdentification"
>>>> id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
>>>> -                    <include-menu name="newPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
>>>> +                <screenlet title="${uiLabelMap.PartyPartyIdentifications}" navigation-menu-name="NewPartyIdentification"
>>>> id="PartyIdentificationPanel">
>>>> +                    <include-menu name="NewPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyMenus.xml"/>
>>>>                       <include-form name="listPartyIdentification" location="component://party/widget/partymgr/PartyForms.xml"/>
>>>>                   </screenlet>
>>>>               </widgets>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Michael Brohl-3]

Jacques,

inline.

Am 12.09.16 um 15:51 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>
>> the parenthesis comes from our blog post format where we put the JIRA
>> issue reference just behind the title (you know it because we are
>> working together on this every month).
>
> Sorry, I did not notice this aspect. Do we really need parenthesis
> there, what does it add. A simple list separated by spaces would not
> be enough? It seems it would even easier to read to me.
Please do not start to question the blog style/format now, we use it for
months, you reviewed it for month and did not raise such a question
anytime in the past. Why now?
>
>>
>> Of course, we can parse without the parenthesis and set them when we
>> generate the development details. But again, we already agreed upon
>> this format and I don't see a big effort for a committer to put
>> parenthesis around the Jira issue.
>
> Sorry, I see a big difference with commits like the one below!
And I clearly stated that the below commit is an exception, we normally
only have one issue reference per commit. And following Gil's smart
suggestion, the other Jira references could go in the details section
without the parenthesis. I would be fine with that.

>
>>
>> The above example is an exception when it comes to effort. We
>> normally have one JIRA reference in the commit messages.
>>
>> When I count the time we already spent discussing these nitpicking
>> details, you could have written a whole bunch of correct commit
>> messages in this time. You are making it very hard to establish such
>> a simple guideline.
>
> Again, I really don't see the need for the parenthesis. And I'd be
> happy to change that myself once in wiki and elsewhere it's needed
> rather than have to type it every time I commit (yes I commit a lot :p)

Please, Jacques, that's ridiculous.

You already have checked in your personal Tortoise template in SVN, you
didn't have to type anything except the Jira number for this part of the
commit message.

Until now, you seem to be the only one objecting against the proposed
format, other committers have given +1 and showed support for it. They
even use it right now.

But I will not stick to the proposal if there are other objections.

So fellow committers, let's hear what you think.

Thanks,
Michael

[Jacques Le Roux]

Michael, inline...

Le 12/09/2016 à 16:36, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> Am 12.09.16 um 15:51 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> Please do not start to question the blog style/format now, we use it for months, you reviewed it for month and did not raise such a question anytime
> in the past. Why now?

Because, to paraphrase Lisp nickname,  I don't want a /Lots of Irritating Superfluous Parentheses/ everywhere
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_(programming_language)#cite_note-LEVIN2-38
Kidding with the Lisp reference ;) But I guess you get my point, why should I add parentheses when I don't need them?

 1. It would be easier to read in the wiki (sorry for not spotting that earlier)
 2. It would be easier to commit
 3. It's still easy to change now, will not in the future

>>
>>> And I clearly stated that the below commit is an exception, we normally only have one issue reference per commit. And following Gil's smart
>>> suggestion, the other Jira references could go in the details section without the parenthesis. I would be fine with that.

I don't want an exceptional rule for exceptional cases. I just don't want a /Lots of Irritating Superfluous Parentheses/ everywhere

>>
>> Again, I really don't see the need for the parenthesis. And I'd be happy to change that myself once in wiki and elsewhere it's needed rather than
>> have to type it every time I commit (yes I commit a lot :p)
> Please, Jacques, that's ridiculous.
> You already have checked in your personal Tortoise template in SVN, you didn't have to type anything except the Jira number for this part of the
> commit message.

If I use (OFBIZ-xxxx) I have to get to the position where to put the number so

 1. Get to the line (any mean)
 2. Ctrl+ -> key twice (or End key then <- key)
 3. Type the number

If I use OFBIZ- I have to get to the position where to put the number so

 1. Get to the line (any mean)
 2. End key
 3. Type the number

It's the Ctrl+ -> key twice that I wanted to avoid. But I found after that I can also use End key + <- key End and I can agree that it's not that bad
and I could use it

I though still don't understand why you want /Parentheses/ around Jira issue numbers in the blog and hence in commits. What does it add in 1st place?
I'd really want to have an answer to this question :-o

Jacques

>
> Until now, you seem to be the only one objecting against the proposed format, other committers have given +1 and showed support for it. They even
> use it right now.
>
> But I will not stick to the proposal if there are other objections.
>
> So fellow committers, let's hear what you think.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 15:51, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Again, I really don't see the need for the parenthesis. And I'd be happy to change that myself once in wiki and elsewhere it's needed rather than
> have to type it every time I commit (yes I commit a lot :p)
>
> Jacques
By elsewhere  above I mean I can also help to change the process which create the blog lines. I though don't propose to participate to the process
itself ;) And I thank you again for that Michael!

Jacques

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

I am rather interested in knowing if other committers share similar
concerns or resistance to comply with the template as it is defined in the
Wiki at the moment. If this is not the case then I think that Jacques
should step back and stop this endless thread that is not going anywhere.

Jacopo

[taher]

We write long emails, we write a lot of code, we write wiki pages, we write
documentation, we write comments in Jiras and in fact what we do every day
is write.

Writing a few parentheses is hardly work especially since more than 90% of
the time a commit is related to a single Jira. The effort we are spending
here discussing it is much more than writing those parentheses.

Maybe the template is not perfect, but it's good enough and we agreed on it
and the effort is already made (which I am thankful for) so I think we
should move forward. We have far more important work to focus on.

On Sep 12, 2016 6:42 PM, "Jacopo Cappellato" <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am rather interested in knowing if other committers share similar
> concerns or resistance to comply with the template as it is defined in the
> Wiki at the moment. If this is not the case then I think that Jacques
> should step back and stop this endless thread that is not going anywhere.
>
> Jacopo
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 17:41, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
> I am rather interested in knowing if other committers share similar
> concerns or resistance to comply with the template as it is defined in the
> Wiki at the moment. If this is not the case then I think that Jacques
> should step back and stop this endless thread that is not going anywhere.
>
> Jacopo
>
I'd just like to know why we should have parentheses there. Which ends with: why having parentheses in the monthly blog entries? I'm curious about it
because it starts there.

Jacques

[Scott Gray-3]

We should probably just have a vote on the contentious points and be done
with it.  The general consensus doesn't seem to be good enough for Jacques.

Regards
Scott

On 13 September 2016 at 03:41, Jacopo Cappellato <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am rather interested in knowing if other committers share similar
> concerns or resistance to comply with the template as it is defined in the
> Wiki at the moment. If this is not the case then I think that Jacques
> should step back and stop this endless thread that is not going anywhere.
>
> Jacopo
>