| Re: [lyo-dev] Proposal: Remove non-OSLC4J Bugzilla adapter from Lyo |
+1 on removing the non-OSLC4J adapter since it was confusing and unclear which one to use, and what the differences were.
I strongly recommend leaving a completed version in the "docs" repository as part of the tutorial, or at least indicate in the tutorial that a completed working version exists in the "server" repository. If necessary, then an additional copy in the "server" repository is not a bad idea as a sample.
___________________________________________________________________________
Samit Mehta
mailto:samit.mehta@xxxxxxxxxx
lyo-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 10/17/2012 10:25:17 AM:
> From: Michael Fiedler <fiedler.mf@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Lyo project developer discussions <lyo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Date: 10/17/2012 10:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [lyo-dev] Proposal: Remove non-OSLC4J Bugzilla adapter from Lyo
> Sent by: lyo-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Open to suggestions on whether to keep it where it is or move it.
> Originally it went in docs since it represented the final version
> of the workshop labs, but it has since evolved (OSLC query support +
> other improvements) and might be a better fit with the other sample
> adapters in the server repo. I'll plan on moving it unless there is
> a good reason to keep it in docs.
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Samuel Padgett <spadgett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +1, I agree.
>
> Is the plan to keep the adapter in the docs repository and simply
> remove the one in the server repository?
> --
> Best Regards,
> Samuel Padgett | IBM Rational | spadgett@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> [image removed] Steve Speicher ---10/17/2012 09:28:24 AM---This
> makes good sense to me. The new OSLC4J-based one is fairly complete
> and actively used.
>
> [image removed]
> From:
>
> [image removed]
> Steve Speicher <sspeiche@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> [image removed]
> To:
>
> [image removed]
> Lyo project developer discussions <lyo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
>
> [image removed]
> Date:
>
> [image removed]
> 10/17/2012 09:28 AM
>
> [image removed]
> Subject:
>
> [image removed]
> Re: [lyo-dev] Proposal: Remove non-OSLC4J Bugzilla adapter from Lyo
>
> [image removed]
> Sent by:
>
> [image removed]
> lyo-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
> This makes good sense to me. The new OSLC4J-based one is fairly
> complete and actively used.
>
> --
> - Steve
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Michael Fiedler <fiedler.mf@xxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
> As part of the creation of the OSLC workshop, the Bugzilla sample
> adapter was re-factored/re-written using OSLC4J. Lyo now has two
> Bugzilla adapters, the non-OSLC4J version in the
> org.eclipse.lyo.server.git repo and the OSLC4J version in the
> org.eclipse.lyo.docs.git repo (along with the rest of the workshop)
>
> Going forward it would be easiest to only maintain 1 version of the
> adapter. Any objections or comments on removing the non-OSLC4J
> version? Please respond on-list if you have a need for the non-OSLC4J
> version or have some argument for keeping it. Of course, it won't be
> gone forever as Git magic can bring it back if needed. I'll wait a
> week for any feedback.
>
> I've opened https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=392162 to
> track this.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> lyo-dev mailing list
> lyo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/lyo-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lyo-dev mailing list
> lyo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/lyo-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lyo-dev mailing list
> lyo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/lyo-dev
> _______________________________________________
> lyo-dev mailing list
> lyo-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/lyo-dev