On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Subject updated ... new thread > > On 8/15/13, Ryan Ollos <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Matevž Bradač <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> On 12. Aug, 2013, at 19:08, Olemis Lang wrote: > >> > >> > On 8/11/13, Ryan Ollos <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> > >> > [...] > >> >>>> Which reminds me, I think we should consider moving the Bootstrap > >> >>>> content > >> >>>> to `bloodhound_theme`, so I've created #633: > >> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/633 > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Bootstrap css+js is used by both dashboard and theme . If it is > >> >>> migrated onto theme how will it be made available for dashboard > >> >>> layouts and widgets as well ? > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> The Boostrap CSS and JS are added by bloodhoud_theme.html, so only > the > >> >> paths would need to be changed, e.g. dashboard/css/bootstrap.css -> > >> >> theme/css/bootstrap.css BloodhoundDashboard calls add_stylesheet a > >> >> few > >> >> times, and we'd have to change the path to the content. > >> >> > >> > > >> > my concern is that such approach will lead to cyclic package > >> > dependencies i.e. theme depends upon dashboard widgets to build the UI > >> > whereas dashboard depends upon theme for bootstrap styling . That's a > >> > problematic situation [citation needed]. I do not see the benefit of > >> > adding such complexity just to move bootstrap files to a different > >> > plugin (especially if they are working ok where they are now). > >> > > >> > The other alternative I see is to create a separate package for shared > >> assets . > >> > >> +1, I think a separate, "core" package would be the correct approach > >> to deal with functionality/resources common to bloodhound plugins. > >> > >> > > >> >> It seems logical for the Boostrap code to be part of the ThemePlugin > >> since > >> >> it is responsible for adding Boostrap to all of the pages (via > >> >> `bloodhound_theme.html`). I agree with the aim that > >> >> "Bootstrap-specific > >> >> enhancements should be added by theme". If more work needs to be done > >> for > >> >> this to be realized in BloodhoundDashboard, then I think we should at > >> least > >> >> consider making those changes. > >> >> > >> > > >> > Not all bootstrap styles have to be added by theme . Widgets are > >> > «self-contained» components so they have to take care of loading > >> > required assets , including bootstrap css+js , no matter on what > >> > context they are inserted . > >> > >> IMO this also speaks in favour of a "core" package. Although the widgets > >> are self-contained, we probably want to avoid having each widget bring > >> their > >> own copies of all the needed resources - this could presumably lead to > >> various (in)compatibility issues etc. > > > > > > I also like the idea of a core package. The reason I was bothered by > having > > the Bootstrap resources in BloodhoundDashboard is that there doesn't seem > > to be a logical reason why BloodhoundTheme should have a dependency on > > BloodhoundDashboard. > > Yes , there is a reason . AFAICR BH templates (e.g. milestones, ...) > include widgets . > I wasn't clear enough. Yes, I understand that BloodhoundTheme utilizes widgets. What was the reason for making the widgets part of BloodhoundDashboard rather than BloodhoundTheme? I don't understand the logic for making BloodhoundDashboard the "core" component. > > For new developers this will make it more challenging > > to understand the structure of the project, and in general having > > dependencies between the plugins will reduce the ability for users to > > configure their installations by deactivating Components they aren't > > interested in. > > > > If dashboard is disabled how come components and activity widgets will > be rendered ? The require the underlying dashboard / widgets > architecture . That's always been the point . > ;) > > > The main question I have is whether that core package should be > > BloodhoundTheme, > > - > > > or instead we mostly leave BloodhoundTheme the way as it > > is, and extract the shared resources primarily from BloodhoundDashboard > > into "BloodhoundCore". It sounds like we are looking to add a new > > "BloodhoundCore" package. > > > > AFAICT , even now I do not notice enough content to create a > BloodhoundCore package. Unless I'm missing something I only see > bootstrap and a few html templates plus maybe a few helpers . > > -- > Regards, > > Olemis - @olemislc > -- Ryan Ollos I *Apache Bloodhound Committer* WANdisco // *Non-Stop Data* e. [email protected] twitter @rjollos <https://twitter.com/rjollos> THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY, AND MAY BE PRIVILEGED. If this message was misdirected, WANdisco, Inc. and its subsidiaries, ("WANdisco") does not waive any confidentiality or privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately and destroy the message without disclosing its contents to anyone. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. The views and opinions expressed in this e-mail message are the author's own and may not reflect the views and opinions of WANdisco, unless the author is authorized byWANdisco to express such views or opinions on its behalf. All email sent to or from this address is subject to electronic storage and review by WANdisco. Although WANdisco operates anti-virus programs, it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever caused by viruses being passed.
