Kuali Rice Development
  1. Kuali Rice Development
  2. KULRICE-14037

Apply Jonathan's patch for KFSMI-3654 to 2.1.x code line

    Details

    • Type: Task Task
    • Status: Closed Closed
    • Priority: Critical Critical
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: Development
    • Security Level: Public (Public: Anyone can view)
    • Labels:
    • Similar issues:
      KULRICE-14039Apply patches to solve KFSMI-12635 on Rice 2.1.x code line
      KULRICE-14099Eliminate duplicate workflow qualifiers in 2.2-2.5 code lines
      KULRICE-14036Please add new OLTP lockout message parameter to Rice 2.1.x base data
      KULRICE-13325Automate patch to trunk merging for current 2.5 development
      KULRICE-11672Remove patched JOTM files from krad-data module and created a patched version of JOTM
      KULRICE-12880Apply Spring 4.0.5 upgrade
      KULRICE-13286Wrong header being applied even when overridden
      KULRICE-10220Proposed patch to org.kuali.rice.krad.uif.element.ViewHeader.java
      KULRICE-5448Apply these 1.0.3.3 fixes to Rice 2.0 code branch
      KULRICE-1146apply patch to eliminate bug with use of extent class to our version of ojb
    • Epic Link:
    • Rice Module:
      KEW
    • Application Requirement:
      KFS
    • KAI Review Status:
      Not Required
    • KTI Review Status:
      Not Required
    • Code Review Status:
      Not Required
    • Include in Release Notes?:
      Yes

      Description

      Jonathan should have a fix for KFSMI-3654; we just need it applied to Rice.

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Jonathan Keller added a comment -

          Yes, I did. I spent more time fighting to try not to include them and generate a patch file which I could re-use. After an hour of that I just checked the files in so I can work in Rice without the overhead of reconfiguring every time.

          As for the other branches - no I have not. I wasn't sure what the process was for that. Manual? Or merge of the 2.1 branch changes forward to the next one?

          Show
          Jonathan Keller added a comment - Yes, I did. I spent more time fighting to try not to include them and generate a patch file which I could re-use. After an hour of that I just checked the files in so I can work in Rice without the overhead of reconfiguring every time. As for the other branches - no I have not. I wasn't sure what the process was for that. Manual? Or merge of the 2.1 branch changes forward to the next one?
          Hide
          Claus Niesen added a comment -

          Manual merging is probably best.

          Show
          Claus Niesen added a comment - Manual merging is probably best.
          Hide
          Jonathan Keller added a comment -

          Yea - it may take a little to merge it. I realized (after pushing it to 2.1) that I have no way to test it. There is nothing in the KEW integration tests or sample applications which would exercise this code. It's identical to what we have in production at UCD, but I'm not comfortable pushing a change to 4 versions of Rice without some assurance that there is not something stupid in there which might break workflow.

          Now, this is not a blocker from a system operation standpoint. So, do you want me spending my time on that, or integrating into 2.5 only? I figure it will take a number of hours to figure out how to get the needed data and DD files set up within the integration test framework to test this properly.

          Show
          Jonathan Keller added a comment - Yea - it may take a little to merge it. I realized (after pushing it to 2.1) that I have no way to test it. There is nothing in the KEW integration tests or sample applications which would exercise this code. It's identical to what we have in production at UCD, but I'm not comfortable pushing a change to 4 versions of Rice without some assurance that there is not something stupid in there which might break workflow. Now, this is not a blocker from a system operation standpoint. So, do you want me spending my time on that, or integrating into 2.5 only? I figure it will take a number of hours to figure out how to get the needed data and DD files set up within the integration test framework to test this properly.
          Hide
          Jonathan Keller added a comment -

          Per discussion - will check in code to 2.1 branch and resolve this JIRA. A new JIRA will be opened to apply the changes to the other Rice versions after KFS has had a chance to test the results.

          Show
          Jonathan Keller added a comment - Per discussion - will check in code to 2.1 branch and resolve this JIRA. A new JIRA will be opened to apply the changes to the other Rice versions after KFS has had a chance to test the results.
          Hide
          Claus Niesen added a comment -

          This change was rolled back. See KULRICE-14252 for instructions to reapply.

          Show
          Claus Niesen added a comment - This change was rolled back. See KULRICE-14252 for instructions to reapply.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Jonathan Keller
              Reporter:
              James Smith
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Structure Helper Panel