the application is erroring out requiring a clear node in the source

[cameronwills]

the application is erroring out requiring a clear node in the source

[CameronWills]

I don't understand the bug. Cannot seem to replicate..

I've tried adding in the connectionStrings node on the demo page (https://fatantelopetester.apphb.com/) and it appears to generate the correct output?

Are you able to provide an example web configs (source and target)?
Obviously remove any private and sensitive information from the configs first..

Thanks,
Cameron

[rafiksamman1982]

[File removed]

FatAntelope.exe SampleWeb.config Web.Config webxdt.config finalweb.config is the call i made.

[rafiksamman1982]

I had to put a <clear \> in the SampleWeb.config to get it to work.

…

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: I don't understand the bug. Cannot seem to replicate.. I've tried adding in the connectionStrings node on the demo page ( https://fatantelopetester.apphb.com/) and it appears to generate the correct output? Are you able to provide an example web configs (source and target)? Obviously remove any private and sensitive information from the configs first.. Thanks, Cameron — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw5chJCXHT1cbmQFp0YL97W8gCu3Xks5rmwuFgaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[rafiksamman1982]

Hi Camerone, sorry to be a pest, is there any outlook on this?

[CameronWills]

Hi Rafik,

I've pushed a fix in the latest version: https://github.com/CameronWills/FatAntelope/releases/tag/0.2.10

I'll close this issue now, be feel free to reopen if still experiencing problems.

[rafiksamman1982]

I have a question, is everything in the target file always preserved?

[CameronWills]

Yes. That is the intention..
Applying the 'patch' file to the 'source' file should generate the same/equivalent XML as the 'target' file. With the one exception: nodes in the transformed file can appear in a different order to the target file.

Are you seeing some nodes not being preserved?

[rafiksamman1982]

Not exactly, if you look at the target file at the bottom the basic http binding does not match the source. but the changes in the source for that basic http binding is not being transfered over is that supposed to happen?

…

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: Yes. That is the intention.. Applying the 'patch' transform file to the 'source' file should generate the same/equivalent XML as the 'target' file. *With the one exception*: nodes in the transformed file can appear in a different order to the target file. Are you seeing some nodes not being preserved? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw7jWvX1NbMu7H25MfaLrfOMLmiEWks5rnzfOgaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[CameronWills]

The purpose of the tool is to generate a patch, which is then used to convert 'source' into 'target'.

In your example, if there are XML nodes that exist in SampleWeb.config but don't exist in Web.config - they will be removed when the webxdt.config is applied.

Once the webxdt.config is applied to SampleWeb.config, the <basicHttpBinding> section` is the same as it appears in the 'Web.config'. Assuming you're using the new version 0.2.10 to generate the patch

Does that make sense?

[rafiksamman1982]

That makes sense but the file set I gave you doesn't show that behavior the node was updated but not all child elements were transfered.

…

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017, 1:49 AM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: The purpose of the tool is to generate a patch, which is then used to convert 'source' into 'target'. In your example, if there are XML nodes that exist in SampleWeb.config but don't exist in Web.config - they will be removed when the webxdt.config is applied. Once the webxdt.config is applied to SampleWeb.config, the section is the same as it appears in the 'Web.config'. *Assuming you're using the new version 0.2.10 to generate and apply the patch* Does that make sense? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw7GsamYcW8QX5u1RbCFAmfL9iFirks5rn2T5gaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[CameronWills]

Yep, the bugs in 0.2.9 were affecting the that <basicHttpBinding> node as well.

[rafiksamman1982]

Are you aware that the licensing terms of FatAntelope are commonly referred to as a licensing virus by some? I'm not able to you use this tool as a result of this. Which license is this from? Or is this the original programmer's terms?

…

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: Yep, the bugs in 0.2.9 were affecting the that <basicHttpBinding> node as well. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bwwFgnDI44ko4wCy6eb4lVPNcgiVoks5rodMagaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[rafiksamman1982]

I need to know if i need to make the code that will call the FatAntelope.exe freely available to the public or if I can just refer back to this site and the original algorithm implementation's site.

[rafiksamman1982]

Cameron sorry once again for pestering you but do you have an answer for two comments above?

[CameronWills]

The license terms and conditions were from the original developer of the X-Diff algorithm and source code, which I ported from Java to C#. The X-Diff algorithm handles the comparison of XML documents.

From what I understand of condition 3 of their license, the source code of any binary that uses X-Diff, or it's derivatives, must be freely available and reproduce the license copyright and conditions..

So I think this would prohibit using FatAntelope being used in a closed-source or commercial product.

May I ask what you're building?

[rafiksamman1982]

I'm responsible for our product updater utility. I'm trying to get the web.config updates stabilized and I need a way to do that consitently across all our webapps. The updater will call out to the FatAntelope.exe from your release. Since it's just a command line interface call through a process start in .net does that constitute a simple call through the os? I'm not affecting the access to your code or the original programmer's Algorithmic implementation. The updater is not a commercial tool it has proprietary processes in there that affect our products but your tool is the best at what I need it for right now and i'm in a bind not being able to use it. Can a license be purchased?

…

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017, 5:07 PM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: The license terms and conditions were from the original developer of the X-Diff algorithm and source code, which I ported from Java to C#. The X-Diff algorithm handles the comparison of XML documents. From what I understand of condition 3 of their license, the source code of any binary that uses X-Diff, or it's derivatives, must be freely available and reproduce the license copyright and conditions.. So I think this would prohibit using FatAntelope being used in a closed-source or commercial product. May I ask what you're building? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw6ex-cH8J_WHCvTdfvDRMeY3h2o1ks5rpDCYgaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[CameronWills]

Ok, from my understanding of the license, the conditions relate to redistribution of X-Diff derivatives.
So you're ok to use the FatAntelope privately within your organisation - as long as you're not redistributing software containing the X-Diff algorithm to third parties, or particularly if you're trying to commercially sell a piece of software that contains it.

From what you describe, you're using FatAntelope as part of your build / deployment process for your web apps? But the webapps themselves do not contain or use it ?

In this scenario, most people would use FatAntelope one time only, generate the patch file (web.release.config), and then include it webapp project (.csproj) underneath web.config. Then your developers would maintain this file going forward, alongside the web.config:

But I might be mis-understanding your use.

[rafiksamman1982]

We have an updater utility that is free that is distributed to customers so they can receive updates in their environments. That utility needs fat antelope to update customer web.configs in their environments. So I am distributing my utility and fat antelope would be distributed.

…

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017, 9:16 AM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: Ok, from my understanding of the license, the conditions relate to *redistribution* of X-Diff derivatives. So you're ok to use the FatAntelope privately within your organisation - as long as you're not redistributing software containing the X-Diff algorithm to third parties, or particularly if you're trying to commercially sell a piece of software that contains it. From what you describe, you're using FatAntelope as part of your build / deployment process for your web apps? But the webapps themselves do not contain or use it ? In this scenario, most people would use FatAntelope one time only, generate the patch file (web.release.config), and then include it webapp project (.csproj) underneath web.config. Then your developers would maintain this file going forward, alongside the web.config: [image: image] <https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1278887/24322489/513f4134-11b9-11e7-8a31-29d819b80e20.png> But I might be mis-understanding your use. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw-3U9RumcM1dHSVm70vce0fJUMOBks5rpRPDgaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[rafiksamman1982]

Can I get a response on this? is a license available to be purchased? On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Rafik Samman <[email protected]> wrote:

…

We have an updater utility that is free that is distributed to customers so they can receive updates in their environments. That utility needs fat antelope to update customer web.configs in their environments. So I am distributing my utility and fat antelope would be distributed. On Sat, Mar 25, 2017, 9:16 AM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: > Ok, from my understanding of the license, the conditions relate to > *redistribution* of X-Diff derivatives. > So you're ok to use the FatAntelope privately within your organisation - > as long as you're not redistributing software containing the X-Diff > algorithm to third parties, or particularly if you're trying to > commercially sell a piece of software that contains it. > > From what you describe, you're using FatAntelope as part of your build / > deployment process for your web apps? But the webapps themselves do not > contain or use it ? > > In this scenario, most people would use FatAntelope one time only, > generate the patch file (web.release.config), and then include it webapp > project (.csproj) underneath web.config. Then your developers would > maintain this file going forward, alongside the web.config: > > [image: image] > <https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1278887/24322489/513f4134-11b9-11e7-8a31-29d819b80e20.png> > > But I might be mis-understanding your use. > > — > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#5 (comment)>, > or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw-3U9RumcM1dHSVm70vce0fJUMOBks5rpRPDgaJpZM4MhAhX> > . >

[CameronWills]

I'm not aware of a commercial license - you would need to contact the creator of X-Diff for their commercial licensing options..

Alternatively, you could offer the source code for your updater utility to your customers if they asked for it? If there is no risk to your business of loosing valuable intellectual property by sharing the source code? And then you would also just reproduce the copyright/license somewhere in the utility output?

[rafiksamman1982]

We have security details regarding our products that we have in the updater that we can't give the customers. Thanks for the reply, FatAntelope is governed by very restrictive licensing terms as a result of the xdiff algorithm port to c# and it actually does not provide one last feature that I was looking for.

…

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017, 7:13 PM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: I'm not aware of a commercial license - you would need to contact the creator of X-Diff for their commercial licensing options.. Alternatively, you could offer the source code for your updater utility to your customers *if they asked for it?* If there is no risk to your business of loosing valuable intellectual property by sharing the source code? And then you would also just reproduce the copyright/license somewhere in the utility output? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw3eo2-qhDsQrYbybV0uljl0e7TKTks5rqEKngaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[CameronWills]

No problem. Thanks for the feedback and sorry I cant be more helpful. I'm by no means a licensing guru, so feel free to get a second opinion. I chose X-Diff because it seemed like the simple implementation for unordered XML diffing.

What feature we're you referring to? Perhaps something worth implementing for the community?

[rafiksamman1982]

The feature is to be able to provide parameters with actual xpaths and a value for it for specific values that need to be updated after a merge is one. Your utility can only be used in a private setting.

…

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017, 9:14 PM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: No problem. Thanks for the feedback and sorry I cant be more helpful. I'm by no means a licensing guru, so feel free to get a second opinion. I chose X-Diff because it seemed like the simple implementation for unordered XML diffing. What feature we're you referring to? Perhaps something worth implementing for the community? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw2TMOaSEONFX9TXt3eitZedYvPc6ks5rqF77gaJpZM4MhAhX> .

[rafiksamman1982]

You can refer to xmlconfigmerge on code project

…

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017, 9:27 PM Rafik Samman ***@***.***> wrote: The feature is to be able to provide parameters with actual xpaths and a value for it for specific values that need to be updated after a merge is one. Your utility can only be used in a private setting. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017, 9:14 PM Cameron Wills ***@***.***> wrote: No problem. Thanks for the feedback and sorry I cant be more helpful. I'm by no means a licensing guru, so feel free to get a second opinion. I chose X-Diff because it seemed like the simple implementation for unordered XML diffing. What feature we're you referring to? Perhaps something worth implementing for the community? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG0bw2TMOaSEONFX9TXt3eitZedYvPc6ks5rqF77gaJpZM4MhAhX> .