David, all,
see my replies below.
On 13.10.2010 17:28, Moore, David wrote:
> I don't think they intentionally obfuscate, but the approach that
> Ontoprise has taken for deployment of SMW+ does create a lot of
> problems. For me, the costs far outweighed the benefits. I really
> think it would behoove them to work with other developers in the
> community to build in hooks for alternate SMW+ code into other
> extensions, so that they don't need all the patching. If not for the
> main MediaWiki code, then at least for the rest of the SMW family of
> extensions.
>
> If SMW+ = Yes
> Call alternate SMW+ code
> Else
> Standard extension code
> Endif
>
> I'm waiting for that evolution before jumping into SMW+ again.
Thanks, David, for the feedback. You seem to think that patches are
evil. And we strongly agree with you. There are some alternatives to
patching other extensions: (i) ask the extension developers to
incorporate our changes directly or to add the if/else block that you
propose. (ii) analyse the extension code thoroughly to find loop-holes,
which allow us to add our functionality in a way that does not require
patches. (iii) ask extension developers to add hooks for our code.
ad (i): It is much easier said than done. You can imagine that we would
be the first who are delighted to get rid of a patch in this way. But
usually this takes a long time and sometimes nothing happens at all.
Which IMHO is also understandable from the extension's point of view.
For us, this makes the development process too unpredictable. We do get
in touch with the developers and inform them about the patches as part
of our standard release cycle and sometimes patches become unnecessary,
sometimes they stay.
ad (ii): from a purist-point of view this is better and cleaner. But
from a pragmatic point-of-view this is much worse because it makes our
changes less explicit. When upgrading to a new release of an extension
(ii) might work without any issues or it might silently (and partially)
stop working. In these situations a patch is much more explicit and
improves traceability a lot.
ad (iii): this is the cleanest solution but suffers essentially the same
shortcomings as (i). But in the past we have managed to get some hooks
for our code built-in to other extensions.
And lastly the deployment framework (DF) should mostly hide the patches
from the user by automatically installing our extensions and applying
the necessary patches to other extensions. When uninstalling the halo
extensions with DF the patches are even undone.
Said that, I hope this clarifies our motivations and shows that we are
in touch with the community and we also try to reduce the number of
patches as much as possible and reasonable.
thanks,
michael
On 13.10.2010 17:28, Moore, David wrote:
> I don't think they intentionally obfuscate, but the approach that Ontoprise has taken for deployment of SMW+ does create a lot of problems. For me, the costs far outweighed the benefits. I really think it would behoove them to work with other developers in the community to build in hooks for alternate SMW+ code into other extensions, so that they don't need all the patching. If not for the main MediaWiki code, then at least for the rest of the SMW family of extensions.
>
> If SMW+ = Yes
> Call alternate SMW+ code
> Else
> Standard extension code
> Endif
>
> I'm waiting for that evolution before jumping into SMW+ again.
>
> David Moore
> Business Manager
> Virginia Tech Institute for Policy and Governance
> 205 West Roanoke Street (0489)
> Blacksburg, VA 24061
> VTIPG (540) 231-6775
> Cell (540) 230-6914
> dmoore@...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Katkov Juriy [mailto:katkov.juriy@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 7:43 AM
> To: aedgington
> Cc: semediawiki-user@...
> Subject: Re: [Semediawiki-user] HALO& Forms Questions
>
> HALO
>
> I preferred to give up trying to install Ontoprise extensions. It seemed that Ontoprise just try to force us to buy their product, SMW+. Installation is full of hacks, patches, manually creating tables and so on. Installation progress is badly documented, you've got to go to Ontoprise forums where all discussions will end up in private conversation with developers. In other words it's horrible type of opensource - all sources are open but if you can't make them work you have to pay.
>
> If you succeed in installation, please write a manual with that process.
> Good luck.
>
> FORMS
> The correct syntax is that:
>
> {{{field|ThemeCategory|autocomplete|input type=textarea}}}
>
> here
> field is the keyword;
> ThemeCategory is name of the template parameter
>
> if you want to autocomplete by specific property you can write:
>
> {{{field|ThemeCategory|autocomplete on property=NAMEOFPROP|input type=text}}}
>
> I hope that helps,
> Yury
>
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 4:57 AM, aedgington<aedgington@...> wrote:
>
>> HALO -
>>
>> I can't for the life of me get this to install. I get:
>> ./smwadmin.sh: is a directory
>> whenever i try to install with the deployment tool (yes I've set it to
>> executable). I'm tearing my hair out because I need the HaloACL. Is
>> there a full distribution option other than SMW+ ?
>>
>> FORMS -
>> I can't get autocompletion to work. Do I need to download or install
>> the jquery?
>> {{{field|autocomplete on property=PROPERTY}}} is the correct syntax
>> for the form, yes?
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://old.nabble.com/HALO---Forms-Questions-tp29948709p29948709.html
>> Sent from the Semantic Mediawiki - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -------- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9
>> supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2
>> & L3.
>> Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating
>> great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb
>> _______________________________________________
>> Semediawiki-user mailing list
>> Semediawiki-user@...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-user
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2& L3.
> Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb
> _______________________________________________
> Semediawiki-user mailing list
> Semediawiki-user@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-user
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports
> standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2& L3.
> Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great
> experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb
> _______________________________________________
> Semediawiki-user mailing list
> Semediawiki-user@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-user
>
--
email: erdmann@... Dr. Michael Erdmann
tel: +49 / 163 / 509 8029
http://www.ontoprise.com
ontoprise GmbH - know how to use Know-how
An der RaumFabrik 29; 76227 Karlsruhe; Germany
Registered Office: Karlsruhe, Germany (Amtsgericht Mannheim HRB 109540)
Managing Directors: Prof. Dr. Juergen Angele, Hans-Peter Schnurr
Semantic Enterprise Wiki - SMW+ / Halo Extension
Want to get involved? http://smwforum.ontoprise.com/development
|