RE: Psml management

[Matthew Forsyth]

Yes, that sounds really promising, it would have
circumvented our need to override the
createDefaultPsml() method with Seawave-specific
logic.  I don't yet have any specific suggestions as
to how to work the integration of multiple psml
files sounds like a really interesting problem &
seems like it could be applied to all sorts of psml
related issues!

But, our more significant problem at this point is the
coupling of portet settings with the psml, which
wouldn't be solved by the enhanced role-based psml. 
I'm not sure that it suffice to provide a link that
said something to the effect of, "Click here to
upgrade your portal to the newest version... warning,
all your settings will be lost!"  It would be much
better to store the parameters/settings outside of
psml.  

Haven't really thought this through, but if I could
decouple user settings from the psml files in a way
that would be backwards-compatible, would this system
have a chance of making it into a future jetspeed
release as a replacement for psml-based settings
management?

-Matthew Forsyth
seawave.com



--- Mark Orciuch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew and Stefan,
> 
> You have brought some good points to discussion
> table. You are right that it
> isn't very practical (or secure) for the users to
> assign their own roles. In
> most environments, it would be an administrative
> function to assign any
> additional user roles. Even if particular portal
> uses self-registration
> process, the admin would still be responsible for
> customizing user roles.
> 
> I am currently working on enhancing the
> role-based-psml (see
>
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11735).
> The goal is to
> create initial user profile (psml) based on the
> roles the user is a member
> of. On first login, the profiler will aggregate
> profiles from each role to
> create a single profile. There will also be a
> feature for the user to reset
> their profile to default. This, I believe, may
> address the issue with what
> happens when role profile gets updated - the reset
> will recreate the user
> profile and bring in any new content (customizations
> will be lost, of
> course).
> 
> I have implemented the basic process. One remaining
> feature is the ability
> to handle variety of different layouts. For example,
> one role profile may be
> tab based, another may consist of a single control,
> and yet another may be a
> single menu control. How to combine these to create
> a meaningful profile? My
> thought is to "stack" all tab based profiles and put
> other types of profiles
> in their own tabs.
> 
> If this is something that may fit into your
> requirements, feel free to
> provide any comments or suggestions (please use
> Bugzilla to post any).
> Thanks!
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Mark C. Orciuch
> Next Generation Solutions, Ltd.
> e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web: http://www.ngsltd.com
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Matthew Forsyth
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 3:21 AM
> > To: Jetspeed Users List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Psml management
> >
> >
> > Good questions... strictly out-of the box
> > role-based-psml also wouldn't work for us for the
> same
> > reason, some users have more than one role.  I
> have
> > some custom logic that only looks at the
> particular
> > roles which are associated with a "layout type"...
> in
> > the database these roles aren't differentiated
> from
> > other roles in any way.
> >
> > The question of users getting to chose their own
> role
> > doesn't apply to us; in fact users can't even
> directly
> > sign themselves up to jetspeed.  Their jetspeed
> > account only gets created in response to an
> external
> > process which knows which role they are supposed
> to
> > be.
> >
> > -matt
> >
> >
> > --- Stefan Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi Metthew,
> > > I was thinking about giving psml to users
> depending
> > > on the role as well, but
> > > I came to the conclusion that this doesn't make
> > > sense because: When people
> > > subscribe (i. e. create a new account) they get
> one
> > > specified role anyway. Or
> > > do you leave to visitors to choose which role
> they
> > > want to have ? But then,
> > > when roles mean security restrictions, your
> securtiy
> > > is gone, because people
> > > can choose their role freely. So I thought it
> would
> > > be better to have 

Re: Psml management

[Matthew Forsyth]

Good questions... strictly out-of the box
role-based-psml also wouldn't work for us for the same
reason, some users have more than one role.  I have
some custom logic that only looks at the particular
roles which are associated with a "layout type"... in
the database these roles aren't differentiated from
other roles in any way.

The question of users getting to chose their own role
doesn't apply to us; in fact users can't even directly
sign themselves up to jetspeed.  Their jetspeed
account only gets created in response to an external
process which knows which role they are supposed to
be.

-matt


--- Stefan Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Metthew,
> I was thinking about giving psml to users depending
> on the role as well, but 
> I came to the conclusion that this doesn't make
> sense because: When people 
> subscribe (i. e. create a new account) they get one
> specified role anyway. Or 
> do you leave to visitors to choose which role they
> want to have ? But then, 
> when roles mean security restrictions, your securtiy
> is gone, because people 
> can choose their role freely. So I thought it would
> be better to have the 
> assignment of psmls if the administrator gives roles
> to users.
> One more problem: What to do if the user has got
> multiple roles - which psml 
> take then ? Do you know what the built-in role-based
> psml does in such a case 
> ?
> Thanks for your answers and sorry for asking
> questions instead of helping you.
> Stefan
> 
> Am Mittwoch, 28. August 2002 23:55 schrieben Sie:
> > Here are my experiences with the jetspeed psml
> > management system.  I've had to change a couple
> things
> > in ways which somebody else might find useful
> (please
> > let me know if so!)  Also, I am discovering that I
> may
> > have a (hopefully reconcilable) philosophical
> problem
> > with PSML.
> >
> > Before I begin, our portal (still in development
> > stage) can be seen at
> >
> > http://nurse.ri.seawave.com:8180/portal/portal
> >
> > You can log in using "testcrew/password".
> >
> >
> > We don't plan on letting our users customize their
> > portal pages at all in terms of the layout,
> presence
> > or absence of certain portlets.  However, we need
> to
> > give them ways to customize attributes of their
> > existing portlets.
> >
> > We also need to service more than one TYPE of
> user,
> > each with a different pre-defined set of panes and
> > portlets.
> >
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but we can't use
> role-based
> > PSML because that would prevent the use of
> individual
> > settings  any change to a portlet attribute
> would
> > then be seen by ALL other users in the same role.
> >
> > Also, there is no single user from whom psml files
> for
> > new users could be copied, because that wouldn't
> allow
> > for different layouts for different types of
> users.
> >
> > So I changed JetspeedSecurity to point to my own
> > UserManagement class, and overrode the
> > addDefaultPSML() method to make a copy of the psml
> > associated with the user's role rather than the
> psml
> > of another user (like turbine).
> >
> > Not a huge deal, but now I am arriving at what
> seems
> > to be a bigger problem:
> > Although the psml file of a user will differ from
> > those of his/her peers only in very narrowly
> defined
> > ways (only in the manipulation of attributes for
> > portlets), each user still has a separate copy of
> the
> > file.
> >
> > This means that as we add new functionality to our
> > portal, adding new portlets and presumably moving
> the
> > existing ones around somewhat, ONLY new users will
> > benefit from these changes.
> >
> > Everytime we want to add a new portlet, we'll have
> to
> > write a script that will iterate through
> everyone's
> > psml and manipulate the xml in a certain way,
> adding
> > entries for the new portlet  the exact type of
> > thing that was supposed to be short-circuited by
> the
> > Customizer.   Presumably this will have to be done
> > when the server is shut down, because otherwise
> the
> > psml files of any currently-logged-in users will
> be
> > overwritten back to their old state when a they
> log
> > out.
> >
> > Aren't the notions of CONTENT and SETTINGS
> separable?
> >  Shouldn't this information be stored in 2
> separate
> > files?  Did I miss some way that the current psml
> 

Psml management

[Matthew Forsyth]

Here are my experiences with the jetspeed psml
management system.  I've had to change a couple things
in ways which somebody else might find useful (please
let me know if so!)  Also, I am discovering that I may
have a (hopefully reconcilable) philosophical problem
with PSML. 

Before I begin, our portal (still in development
stage) can be seen at 

http://nurse.ri.seawave.com:8180/portal/portal

You can log in using "testcrew/password".


We don't plan on letting our users customize their
portal pages at all in terms of the layout, presence
or absence of certain portlets.  However, we need to
give them ways to customize attributes of their
existing portlets.   

We also need to service more than one TYPE of user,
each with a different pre-defined set of panes and
portlets.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we can't use role-based
PSML because that would prevent the use of individual
settings  any change to a portlet attribute would
then be seen by ALL other users in the same role.

Also, there is no single user from whom psml files for
new users could be copied, because that wouldn't allow
for different layouts for different types of users.

So I changed JetspeedSecurity to point to my own
UserManagement class, and overrode the
addDefaultPSML() method to make a copy of the psml
associated with the user's role rather than the psml
of another user (like turbine).

Not a huge deal, but now I am arriving at what seems
to be a bigger problem:
Although the psml file of a user will differ from
those of his/her peers only in very narrowly defined
ways (only in the manipulation of attributes for
portlets), each user still has a separate copy of the
file.

This means that as we add new functionality to our
portal, adding new portlets and presumably moving the
existing ones around somewhat, ONLY new users will
benefit from these changes.

Everytime we want to add a new portlet, we'll have to
write a script that will iterate through everyone's
psml and manipulate the xml in a certain way, adding
entries for the new portlet  the exact type of
thing that was supposed to be short-circuited by the
Customizer.   Presumably this will have to be done
when the server is shut down, because otherwise the
psml files of any currently-logged-in users will be
overwritten back to their old state when a they log
out.

Aren't the notions of CONTENT and SETTINGS separable? 
 Shouldn't this information be stored in 2 separate
files?  Did I miss some way that the current psml
system can allow for this?  If not, how much work
would have to be done to allow for this?   I would
certainly be willing to adopt such a project rather
than resorting to the "mass update script" strategy
mentioned above...

-
Matthew Forsyth
Seawave.com

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Pane name is not pane title, but rather numeric pane position

[Matthew Forsyth]

I was trying to figure out why linking to 

/js_panename/Mail

wasn't loading the "Mail" pane...

looking at the runtime data inside
PanedControllerAction.buildNormalContext(), I found
that the names of the 2 panes in my layout are 
"1" and "2".

This seems to be correspond to their position from
left to right, and not to the titles of the panes
which are "Home" and "Mail".

browsing to 
/js_panename/2 
works, although the new pane doesn't get highlighted
(of which you're already aware).

Is this a bug?  Or is the panename supposed to be the
numeric position?  

There is no mention of "1" or "2" as a pane attribute
anywhere in the default.psml for this user.

-Matt Forsyt

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: Linking to a specific pane

[Matthew Forsyth]

> $jslink.getPaneByName("UserBrowser")

This doesn't seem to work... in my velocity template I
have the following: 
Inbox

It evaluates to the following url:

http://localhost:8080/portal/portal/user/mforsyth/page/default.psml/js_panename/Mail

There is a pane named Mail, but it is not activated
when this url loads.  The same pane that was active
before clicking the link is still active.  It's not a
highlighting issue (which I think was referenced
before)... the wrong pane is being shown.

I'll try generating a link using the id of the pane...

-Matthew Forsyth

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Linking to a specific pane

[Matthew Forsyth]

In the new Beta,

>From within the buildNormalContext() method of a
velocity portlet, or within the velocity template
itself, how do I generate a link to change the pane to
another specific pane?

In other words, I need to know how to get the Id of
another pane (not the one currently being shown).

-Matthew Forsyth

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>