Re: [Developers] propsal: vpro-wizards in applications
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:22, Ernst Bunders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Michiel Meeuwissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 08:48, Ernst Bunders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What works then? I would like to have tld's that have information about all the properties and so on. What does a tld do that only mentions the tag files. Is that required for putting them in the jar? Yes. That is exactly what my tool is doing. parse the files and create a model containing all relevant information. this model can than be dumped to xml, and transformed as you wish. I have been looking for a tool like this, but did not find it. I actually started building it as a programming exercise. But I think it can be quite useful. I of course think even a tag file should of course be xml already :-) yeah, well... OK. So that leaves to decide if we expand the mmbase-module format to include tag files, or put the tag files in the jar. My preference goes to the first option. What do you think? I have no objections against expanding the mmbase-module format, if it does not already support this. Though I still think that tag-files implementing something for the general profit can better be distributed in the jar, because that simply is easiest to install and keep coherent. Installing them in WEB-INF/tags is mainly convenient for the maintainer of the library, but she can put them there manually anyway. Not having them there will also discourage people hacking in them, without proper anticipation. But those are just my 2 cents. Well, I totally agree with you, but I don't see how it is possible to do development on them if after each little change you have to redeploy a jar. I just don't see it. If you have some answer to that, I'd go along gladly. Well, I normally test a tag-file from a JSP (or another tagfile), so I make a symlink or so from the tag-files to in WEB-INF/tags, then (temporary) change the uri of the tag-library prefix in the JSP and I'm ready to develop. I sometimes end up with two uri's, one prefixed my-prefix and the other my-prefix-t or so. And every tag I want to do some development on, I don't use my-prefix: but my-prefix-t:. If everything's working I (should) remove the test-uris. Als placing the tags in /META-INF which one could hope to work doesn't seem to. I'll gladly admin that's not ideal, but on the other hand it is not such a big deal either, it adds mere seconds to the development time of such tag, which would probably be measured in days Michiel -- mihxil' http://meeuw.org nl_NL eo_XX en_US ___ Developers mailing list Developers@lists.mmbase.org http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
Re: [Developers] propsal: vpro-wizards in applications
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:43 AM, André van Toly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm OK with making the VPRO wizards a new MMBase application. What I do not understand, but haven't really looked into I must admit, is the dependence on Spring. Maybe you can elaborate on that a bit. hi André I will write a technical walk through when i release it, but the short version is that two parts of spring are used: spring mvc and spring data binding. Spring mvc is used to handle all the posts from the wizards, map them to the appropriate controller and handle errors. Spring data binding is used to instantiate and set properties on 'action' beans. Each action that you can perform with the editors are encapsulated in a bean. Things like 'create node', 'sort node up in list', 'update node'. The names of the html form fields correspond to setters on these action beans. It is possible to combine any number of actions in one request. This is nice for two reasons: - There is 100% decoupling between the front end and the back end. This makes the editors very flexible. You can use the tag files to create standard editor components, but you can just as easily create custom editor bits, that can handle tasks of any complexity. you don't have to know how the actions work internally, you just have to know the setters and populate them correctly. - It is very easy to add your own custom actions. Just extend the abstract 'Action' class, and register your class in the spring context XML. so, that's it. basically. Hope that helped. Op 15 okt 2008, om 11:22 heeft Ernst Bunders het volgende geschreven: Well, I totally agree with you, but I don't see how it is possible to do development on them if after each little change you have to redeploy a jar. I just don't see it. If you have some answer to that, I'd go along gladly. While developing the ones in WEB-INF/tags prevail above the ones in the jar, is my experience. Or don't they? Well the problem is they have a different name space uri, so it has to be either one thing or the other... regards Ernst ---André -- André van Toly MMBase development Userfriendly webdesign W: http://www.toly.nl M: +31(0)627233562 -- ___ Developers mailing list Developers@lists.mmbase.org http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers ___ Developers mailing list Developers@lists.mmbase.org http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
Re: [Developers] propsal: vpro-wizards in applications
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Michiel Meeuwissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 08:48, Ernst Bunders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What works then? I would like to have tld's that have information about all the properties and so on. What does a tld do that only mentions the tag files. Is that required for putting them in the jar? Yes. That is exactly what my tool is doing. parse the files and create a model containing all relevant information. this model can than be dumped to xml, and transformed as you wish. I have been looking for a tool like this, but did not find it. I actually started building it as a programming exercise. But I think it can be quite useful. I of course think even a tag file should of course be xml already :-) yeah, well... OK. So that leaves to decide if we expand the mmbase-module format to include tag files, or put the tag files in the jar. My preference goes to the first option. What do you think? I have no objections against expanding the mmbase-module format, if it does not already support this. Though I still think that tag-files implementing something for the general profit can better be distributed in the jar, because that simply is easiest to install and keep coherent. Installing them in WEB-INF/tags is mainly convenient for the maintainer of the library, but she can put them there manually anyway. Not having them there will also discourage people hacking in them, without proper anticipation. But those are just my 2 cents. Well, I totally agree with you, but I don't see how it is possible to do development on them if after each little change you have to redeploy a jar. I just don't see it. If you have some answer to that, I'd go along gladly. If not, I think I'll go for the mmbase-module extension. regards, Ernst Michiel -- mihxil' http://meeuw.org nl_NL eo_XX en_US ___ Developers mailing list Developers@lists.mmbase.org http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers ___ Developers mailing list Developers@lists.mmbase.org http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
Re: [Developers] propsal: vpro-wizards in applications
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:14, Michiel Meeuwissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also placing the tags in /META-INF which one could hope to work doesn't seem to. At least that was what I seemed to remember the case. But having it tried again, it does seem to work after all. So also the trick with temporary uri's seems not necessary. You can simply symlink/copy a /META-INF directory. Michiel -- mihxil' http://meeuw.org nl_NL eo_XX en_US ___ Developers mailing list Developers@lists.mmbase.org http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
