[appengine-java] Transferring app to new account
Hello, Does anyone know if there is a way to transfer an app name to a new account. I have an app name reserved in one google account but would like to move it to a new account. Is that possible? Thanks.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
[appengine-java] Blobstore and JUnit?
Hi, I am having problems testing the blobstore. I did the initialization: LocalBlobstoreServiceTestConfig blob = newLocalBlobstoreServiceTestConfig(); blob.setBackingStoreLocation(./blobs); helper = new LocalServiceTestHelper(newLocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig(), blob); But I need some way to put a few files into the blobstore to run the tests. Any hint? -- Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt applications. http://code.google.com/p/guit/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Install plugin failed. Missing Requirement. Eclipse Helios SR1.
When installing GPE, did you choose the option Contact available update sites to find required software checked? Also, what update sites are enabled on your installation of eclipse? You need to make sure that the Helios update site ( download.eclipse.org/releases/helios) is present and enabled. On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 7:50 AM, KevinLippiatt kevin.lippi...@googlemail.com wrote: I am unable to install the Google Plugin for Eclipse. I have Eclipse Helios SR1. Cannot complete the install because one or more required items could not be found. Software being installed: Google Plugin for Eclipse 3.6 1.4.0.v201010280102 (com.google.gdt.eclipse.suite.e36.feature.feature.group 1.4.0.v201010280102) Missing requirement: Google Plugin for Eclipse 3.6 1.4.0.v201010280102 (com.google.gdt.eclipse.suite.e36.feature.feature.group 1.4.0.v201010280102) requires 'org.eclipse.jst.server.core 0.0.0' but it could not be found -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
[appengine-java] Accessing persisted/detached objects after PersistenceManager has been closed
I am trying to get a collection of objects that are stored in the
database using JDO. Once the objects have been retrieved, they are
marshaled into JSON and sent to the client.
I need some help in deciding which of the following two approaches is
the better one:
Approach 1:
// Using detachCopy(...)
public ListEmployee getEmployee(User user) {
PersistenceManager pm = PMF.get().getPersistenceManager();
ListEmployee employees, detached = null;
Query query = pm.newQuery(Employee.class);
try {
employees = (ListEmployee)query.execute();
detached = pm.detachCopyAll(employees);
} finally {
pm.close();
}
return detached;
}
Approach 2:
// Using Transaction with setDetachAllOnCommit(true)
public ListEmployee getEmployee(User user) {
PersistenceManager pm = PMF.get().getPersistenceManager();
pm.setDetachAllOnCommit(true);
Transaction tx = persistenceManager.currentTransaction(); p.p1 {margin:
0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Monaco}
Query query = pm.newQuery(Employee.class);
ListEmployee employees = null;
try {
tx.begin();
employees = (ListEmployee)query.execute(); tx.commit);
} finally {
pm.close();
}
return employees;
}
Any help/advise is greatly appreciated.
-- Thomas
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine for Java group.
To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
[appengine-java] Re: Accessing persisted/detached objects after PersistenceManager has been closed
I just came across the following document: http://www.datanucleus.org/products/accessplatform/performance_tuning.html ..., which lists two more ways for Reading persistent objects outside a transaction and PersistenceManager. -- Thomas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
[appengine-java] Re: Blobstore and JUnit?
Hi, Everything you need is detailed here: http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java/browse_thread/thread/2bea1295a3f542de/854ea95dcd986dab regards didier On Nov 28, 6:13 pm, Gal Dolber gal.dol...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am having problems testing the blobstore. I did the initialization: LocalBlobstoreServiceTestConfig blob = newLocalBlobstoreServiceTestConfig(); blob.setBackingStoreLocation(./blobs); helper = new LocalServiceTestHelper(newLocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig(), blob); But I need some way to put a few files into the blobstore to run the tests. Any hint? -- Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt applications. http://code.google.com/p/guit/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
[appengine-java] Re: Transferring app to new account
Hi, You have to: 1) create your new Google Account 2) From the old account authorize the new account as developper 3) check that everything is ok from the new account 4) revoke the old account as developper from the new one. Done! didier On Nov 28, 5:56 pm, Kamal kamalka...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, Does anyone know if there is a way to transfer an app name to a new account. I have an app name reserved in one google account but would like to move it to a new account. Is that possible? Thanks.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Eclipse - Linked Stylesheets
Hello, I am using eclipse IDE to create my AppEngine Applications. I have a Stylesheet that I have been using in all of the projects. The Stylesheet file is actually included in the war folder of each project (different copies). I have been trying to move this to a seperate folder and then create a link to the file in my projects war folder. It shows up as a linked file, I can edit it, but when I run the Application I can see that it is not being used. How can I create a link to a common resource and not have to import separate copies in each project? Thanks, Raney -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: logging seems be disabled in my app
Logging has ceased on two of my apps as well. Last recorded entry was at 11/26/2010 at 07:52 PST just as others have indicated. On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Sam G samuel.gam...@gmail.com wrote: Logging disabled in my app as well... along with the intermittent 500 errors on pages that should be working fine. On Nov 26, 8:30 pm, pdknsk pdk...@googlemail.com wrote: Likewise. I've suddenly also been getting 500 errors, which I can't investigate since no error is in the logs. Quite frustrating. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: logging seems be disabled in my app
Logging does not work correctly for my dev app (id: d-crawl). There is already an issue, although it is very old everyone who is also affected should star it: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=3338 On Nov 28, 2:56 pm, Chris Copeland ch...@cope360.com wrote: Logging has ceased on two of my apps as well. Last recorded entry was at 11/26/2010 at 07:52 PST just as others have indicated. On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Sam G samuel.gam...@gmail.com wrote: Logging disabled in my app as well... along with the intermittent 500 errors on pages that should be working fine. On Nov 26, 8:30 pm, pdknsk pdk...@googlemail.com wrote: Likewise. I've suddenly also been getting 500 errors, which I can't investigate since no error is in the logs. Quite frustrating. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine%2Bunsubscrib e...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Polymodels - immutable or mutable?
Hi all, looking for some guidance here... I often find myself using inheritance in such a way that it also indicates state. For example, we might have a PlacedOrder class that will go through an approval process before it becomes the more specialized ApprovedOrder class. The ApprovedOrder class is still a PlacedOrder and maintains all the same attributes while adding a few. The problem comes when classes are immutable - you have to create the new class, copy all the attributes, then destroy the old - thats a drag. I would much prefer to just change the class type then fill in the outstanding attributes. Polymodel, to me, seems to be mutable in that way and I just wanted to get some advice and opinions about it before I charge ahead... Thanks in advance, Rein -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Polymodels - immutable or mutable?
You didn't mention what language you are using but generally speaking you can create either a constructor for class B taking an A object as a parameter that understands how to create itself using the fields of an A object or you can create static class factory methods that produces one class given another such as B.create(A object). One comment on your example: IMO your example is better implemented using a single type, Order, which can have different states depending on where it is in the life cycle of its work flow. For instance, I would have an enum type which contains values for all the different states an Order can have (approved, completed, etc.) and a field of the that type in the Order class serving to indicate the state of any Order. In OO terms, this coincides with the 'has a' as opposed to an 'is a' relationship. 'Is a' relationships use inheritance to model specialization but 'has a' relationships do not. Just my opinion of course and your mileage may vary. Jeff On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Rein Petersen rein.peter...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all, looking for some guidance here... I often find myself using inheritance in such a way that it also indicates state. For example, we might have a PlacedOrder class that will go through an approval process before it becomes the more specialized ApprovedOrder class. The ApprovedOrder class is still a PlacedOrder and maintains all the same attributes while adding a few. The problem comes when classes are immutable - you have to create the new class, copy all the attributes, then destroy the old - thats a drag. I would much prefer to just change the class type then fill in the outstanding attributes. Polymodel, to me, seems to be mutable in that way and I just wanted to get some advice and opinions about it before I charge ahead... Thanks in advance, Rein -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. -- *Jeff Schwartz* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Polymodels - immutable or mutable?
Thanks Jeff, You're right - the way you have described is the way I should do it. But something bothers me about not being able to model relationships and state using inheritance. When I think about the problem domain, I really do want to model it the way I have described. I have achieved it on the client, in javascript, using __proto__ (you can hear the gasps of disgust) and it works great although undocumented and not permitted, in general, for that reason. When I was looking at the composition of the polymodel, it became clear that I could probably manipulate it's 'class' field to change it's type (at serialization to the db), without actually changing the type (in my case python). Afterwards, the next deserialization results in the new type. I know it breaks the rules but I actually haven't seen any rules that expressly say that I cannot change an object's type - in python or javascript or in OOP - maybe I just haven't done enough reading. Rein -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Polymodels - immutable or mutable?
If it works for you then by all means go with it. From my own perspective, though, one based on my own experiences, I've found it best to adhere to tried and true OO principles. There are always exceptions of course and doing something in a prescribed manner without questioning the logic of doing it that way is dangerous in its own right. However, discounting the wisdom of sound principles is equally dangerous IMO. One of the things I really love about developing an application is the iterative process of going back, over and over again, over what I've implemented and how I've implemented it and doing constant code reviews. I am my harshest critic :) Jeff On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Rein Petersen rein.peter...@gmail.comwrote: Thanks Jeff, You're right - the way you have described is the way I should do it. But something bothers me about not being able to model relationships and state using inheritance. When I think about the problem domain, I really do want to model it the way I have described. I have achieved it on the client, in javascript, using __proto__ (you can hear the gasps of disgust) and it works great although undocumented and not permitted, in general, for that reason. When I was looking at the composition of the polymodel, it became clear that I could probably manipulate it's 'class' field to change it's type (at serialization to the db), without actually changing the type (in my case python). Afterwards, the next deserialization results in the new type. I know it breaks the rules but I actually haven't seen any rules that expressly say that I cannot change an object's type - in python or javascript or in OOP - maybe I just haven't done enough reading. Rein -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. -- *Jeff Schwartz* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: Polymodels - immutable or mutable?
It turns out that after listening to advice and doing some more reading that I have corrections to make and an admission that what I have suggestied is probably a bad idea (although there is a strong likelihood I will do it anyway). I found in Python documentation that an object's type may not be changed although what I am proposing is changing a class property that will change the Polymodel object's type at serialization, not during runtime. Digging into Javascript on the subject suggests that it is a dynamically-typed language in that you may bound and unbound a variable from one object of one type to another object of another type. I suppose you can call that dynamic typing but the way I have proposed doing it (which works for me in the latest generation of browsers), is undocumented and clearly an internal variable not intended for general usage. Searching around OOP information hasn't yielded any definitive information on the subject so I can't really decide if this is probably just a risky practice to achieve an end or if it is unwise and unrecommended as well. The correction: my subject line didn't really describe the subject well... of course Polymodels are mutable - of course you can change it's attributes. Rather I would have preferred the subject line to have been Polymodel class type - mutable? I just want to end saying that if you are reading this post - please don't think that I am endorsing the use of javascript __proto__ to change a type, nor the class property of the Polymodel to change type - it is very likely a bad idea (even though I am going to do it anyway). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Nature-focused startup seeking Python App Engine Developer
Software Developer + Nature Lover We're seeking a code monkey who loves monkeys Company Background: We launched Networked Organisms earlier this year with the mission of using fun and engaging technology solutions to help people reconnect with the planet. Our award-winning application, Project Noah, is a mobile platform for wildlife exploration and citizen science. We're building a global network of nature observers and human earth monitors with the hope of one day becoming the go-to platform for documenting all the world's organisms. Today, the Project Noah community has contributors from over 55 countries and counting and our members have participated in a variety of missions ranging from documenting the impact of the Gulf Coast oil spill to sharing ladybug and squirrel sightings for ongoing research at major universities. We're about to release a completely redesigned iPhone application, our first Android application, and a totally overhauled web site with some exciting new features focused on growing community engagement and collaboration. Looking into the future, we have some huge goals and now that we have the backing of National Geographic, we're looking to bring someone onboard to help us reach them. This is where you come in. Experience: We're looking for a software developer who has experience with Python on Google App Engine, knowledge of other frameworks (i.e. Rails or Django) and general web development skills (html / css / javascript / ajax). Beyond that, an interest in mobile technology including iOS and Android is critical. Most importantly, we're looking for someone with a deep love for nature and biodiversity. Term: Starting immediately, we're looking for someone who can commit to 10-12 weeks of project-driven work. There may be an opportunity for a full-time position down the road. Pay: We'll determine a stipend based on experience level and time commitment. Location: Anywhere with a reliable internet connection. More info on what we do: www.networkedorganisms.com Contact: If interested, send us a message with links to your work. Feel free to throw in photos and/or blog posts from your most recent outdoor adventure. You can email us at j...@networkedorganisms.com Some Recent Press: CNN - http://bit.ly/db25Cb Brian Lehrer TV - http://bit.ly/cXkBL5 PopTech! - http://bit.ly/aq2iqK Thanks and we looking forward to hearing from you! -The Project Noah team -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: Polymodels - immutable or mutable?
Just remember that IE doesn't expose an object's __proto__ attribute, so this won't work on IE. Test thoroughly. On Nov 28, 1:21 pm, Rein Petersen rein.peter...@gmail.com wrote: I just want to end saying that if you are reading this post - please don't think that I am endorsing the use of javascript __proto__ to change a type, nor the class property of the Polymodel to change type - it is very likely a bad idea (even though I am going to do it anyway). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
