Re: svn commit: r1760406 - in /ofbiz/trunk: framework/common/data/GeoData_JP.xml specialpurpose/ecommerce/groovyScripts/customer/ViewProfile.groovy specialpurpose/ecommerce/template/customer/ViewProfile.ftl

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Author: jleroux
> Date: Mon Sep 12 16:47:53 2016
> New Revision: 1760406
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760406&view=rev
> Log:
> Fixes: Display of State/Province for non US entities in the customer's
> profile of ecommerce
> (OFBIZ-8231)
>

"Fix for:", not "Fixes:"

Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 18:54, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Author: jleroux
>> Date: Mon Sep 12 16:47:53 2016
>> New Revision: 1760406
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760406&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Fixes: Display of State/Province for non US entities in the customer's
>> profile of ecommerce
>> (OFBIZ-8231)
>>
> "Fix for:", not "Fixes:"
>
> Jacopo
>

Why?

Jacques

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 19:34, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

> Le 12/09/2016 à 18:54, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Author: jleroux
>>> Date: Mon Sep 12 16:47:53 2016
>>> New Revision: 1760406
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760406&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Fixes: Display of State/Province for non US entities in the customer's
>>> profile of ecommerce
>>> (OFBIZ-8231)
>>>
>> "Fix for:", not "Fixes:"
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
> Why?

What for?

>
> Jacques
>
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> ...
>
Why?
>
> Jacques
>

Because it is the standard format that we agreed upon; when I say "we" I am
also including you since you wrote (quoted):

"I think it's a good idea to normalize our commits comments and your
proposition seems good to me Jacopo. Now, of course I wonder about how to
automate it."

Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

12/09/2016 à 19:35, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :

> Le 12/09/2016 à 19:34, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> Le 12/09/2016 à 18:54, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Author: jleroux
>>>> Date: Mon Sep 12 16:47:53 2016
>>>> New Revision: 1760406
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1760406&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> Fixes: Display of State/Province for non US entities in the customer's
>>>> profile of ecommerce
>>>> (OFBIZ-8231)
>>>>
>>> "Fix for:", not "Fixes:"
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>> Why?
>
> What for?
>
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>
>

And while at it, to put a bit of sense in this thread, what would you put for Tasks? I suggest Completes and not Does (see the "Proposal for a more
unified commit message format" thread for the "official" suggestion)

Jacques

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> And while at it, to put a bit of sense in this thread, what would you put
> for Tasks? I suggest Completes and not Does (see the "Proposal for a more
> unified commit message format" thread for the "official" suggestion)
>
> Jacques
>

You are going off topic again: please correct the format of your commit
message.

Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 19:52, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ...
>>
> Why?
>> Jacques
>>
> Because it is the standard format that we agreed upon; when I say "we" I am
> also including you since you wrote (quoted):
>
> "I think it's a good idea to normalize our commits comments and your
> proposition seems good to me Jacopo. Now, of course I wonder about how to
> automate it."
>
> Jacopo
>

What does it adds to the project? You did answer to the "Why?" but not to the "What for?" that I sent a second after.
Why do you want to force me to use "Fix for:" instead of "Fixes:" when it's my pleasure to use "Fixes:" :)

I finally changed my mind, I don't like "Fix for:". I another recent message, talking about myself, I said: "Only fools never change their minds"

Should we continue?

Jacques

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 20:05, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> And while at it, to put a bit of sense in this thread, what would you put
>> for Tasks? I suggest Completes and not Does (see the "Proposal for a more
>> unified commit message format" thread for the "official" suggestion)
>>
>> Jacques
>>
> You are going off topic again: please correct the format of your commit
> message.
>
> Jacopo
>

Sorry I'll not

Jacques

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:
...

> I another recent message, talking about myself, I said: "Only fools never
> change their minds"
>
> Jacques
>
>
Ok... so you are not a fool because you have changed your mind, right? :-)

Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 12/09/2016 à 20:10, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :

> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
> ...
>
>> I another recent message, talking about myself, I said: "Only fools never
>> change their minds"
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
> Ok... so you are not a fool because you have changed your mind, right? :-)
>
> Jacopo
>

You got it ;)

Jacques

[Michael Brohl-3]

Thanks for your suggestion, Jacques,

I think it makes sense to have something for tasks, in case Implemented,
Improved, Fix for or Documentation does not apply.

For sake of consistency with the prefixes we already agreed upon, I'd
suggest to use "Completed". I will put it in the Wiki.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 12.09.16 um 19:57 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> And while at it, to put a bit of sense in this thread, what would you
> put for Tasks? I suggest Completes and not Does (see the "Proposal for
> a more unified commit message format" thread for the "official"
> suggestion)
>
> Jacques
>