OFBiz › OFBiz - Dev

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

32 messages Options

BJ Freeman

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

that looks reasonable.have to looks up page.

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:16 PM:

> You'll need to get put the <viewmap>@page value into the context and run a script in your main-decorator to determine the correct values
>
> if (page.like("component://partymgr")
> applicationMenuName = "Party";
> elseif(page.like("component://product")
> applicationMenuName="Product";
> etc
> parameters.put("applicationMenuName", applicationMenuName);
>
> then in your main-decorator, instead of having
> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu" global="true"/>
> you will have
> <set field="applicationMenuName" vlaue="${parameters.applicationMenuName}"/>
> etc
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:07:08 PM
> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>
>
> here is an exmple
> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu" global="true"/>
> <set field="applicationMenuLocation"
> Value="component://setup/widget/setup/MainSetupMenus.xml"
> global="true"/>
>
> now I can only setup that up for one menu
> so how do I set that up for each menu for each app?
>
> BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:59 PM:
>> Oh.. well I did.
>> and got all sorts of errors because I has not included what that
>> application expected for its decorator.
>>
>> and I could not find a way to use the app specific information for
> each
>> app in my main-decorator.
>>
>> which started me down the road to app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>
>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:50 PM:
>>> Woops...pressed the send button by mistake.
>>>
>>> Make your own decorator in /myapp/widget/CommonScreens.xml
>>>
>>> create a main-decorator and a global decorator and use modify to
> your heart's content
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:33:01 PM
>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>
>>>
>>> so what is the approach that works?
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:26 PM:
>>>> That's what I wasn't understanding. Your approach fails with that
>>> problem. The approach others have been using for the last two
> years does
>>> not. I thought you were asserting that both approaches fail.
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:21:55 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> been through this umteem times.
>>>> sigh
>>>> this is not the case for ftl files only widgets.
>>>>
>>>> I access a screen widget in x-app from my custom app.
>>>> that screen has a decorator which eventually looks up
>>>> mainDecoratorLocation to get the main-decorator
>>>>
>>>> so we are back to defining the mainDecoratorLocation.
>>>> I can only define one mainDecoratorLocation in my web.xml
>>>> so if I call another screen widget in y-app the information for the
>>>> x-app main-decorator will be passed causing other problems.
>>>>
>>>> So there is no way a mainDecoratorLocation can be globally declared
>>> to
>>>> use more than one application screen widgets from the custom app
>>>> So there is no use for using the mainDecoratorLocation outside that
>>> app
>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:11 PM:
>>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps
> from
>>>> a custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion that
>>>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have a
>>> context
>>>> of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of xml.
>>>> Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two or
>>> five, it
>>>> doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert a
> context
>>> of
>>>> ownership; that calling a controller from the party controller has
>>> some
>>>> meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> good point. #1
>>>>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until,
> as
>>>> you
>>>>> say it become a problem
>>>>>
>>>>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>>>>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>>>>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>>>>> information.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>>>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad
> solution
>>>>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>>>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>>>>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>>>> controllers will
>>>>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>>>> <include>
>>>>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>>>>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view
>>> out
>>>> is kind
>>>>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>>>>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic
>>>> practices it's
>>>>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>>>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by
>>> making
>>>>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if
>>>> [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>>>>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>>>>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could
>>> certainly
>>>> be
>>>>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>>>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still
> work.
>>>>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their web.xml
>>>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>>>> decorator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

cjhowe

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by cjhowe

sorry, that should be page.startsWith("component://...")
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Howe <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:16:14 PM
Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

You'll need to get put the <viewmap>@page value into the context and
run a script in your main-decorator to determine the correct values

if (page.like("component://partymgr")
applicationMenuName = "Party";
elseif(page.like("component://product")
applicationMenuName="Product";
etc
parameters.put("applicationMenuName", applicationMenuName);

then in your main-decorator, instead of having
<set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu" global="true"/>
you will have
<set field="applicationMenuName"
vlaue="${parameters.applicationMenuName}"/>
etc

----- Original Message ----
From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:07:08 PM
Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

here is an exmple
<set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu" global="true"/>
<set field="applicationMenuLocation"
Value="component://setup/widget/setup/MainSetupMenus.xml"
global="true"/>

now I can only setup that up for one menu
so how do I set that up for each menu for each app?

BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:59 PM:
> Oh.. well I did.
> and got all sorts of errors because I has not included what that
> application expected for its decorator.
>
> and I could not find a way to use the app specific information for
each

> app in my main-decorator.
>
> which started me down the road to app-mainDecoratorLocation
>
> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:50 PM:
>> Woops...pressed the send button by mistake.
>>
>> Make your own decorator in /myapp/widget/CommonScreens.xml
>>
>> create a main-decorator and a global decorator and use modify to

your heart's content

>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:33:01 PM
>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>
>>
>> so what is the approach that works?
>>
>>
>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:26 PM:
>>> That's what I wasn't understanding. Your approach fails with that
>> problem. The approach others have been using for the last two

years does

>> not. I thought you were asserting that both approaches fail.
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:21:55 PM
>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>
>>>
>>> been through this umteem times.
>>> sigh
>>> this is not the case for ftl files only widgets.
>>>
>>> I access a screen widget in x-app from my custom app.
>>> that screen has a decorator which eventually looks up
>>> mainDecoratorLocation to get the main-decorator
>>>
>>> so we are back to defining the mainDecoratorLocation.
>>> I can only define one mainDecoratorLocation in my web.xml
>>> so if I call another screen widget in y-app the information for the
>>> x-app main-decorator will be passed causing other problems.
>>>
>>> So there is no way a mainDecoratorLocation can be globally declared
>> to
>>> use more than one application screen widgets from the custom app
>>> So there is no use for using the mainDecoratorLocation outside that
>> app
>>>
>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:11 PM:
>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps

from
>>> a custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion that
>>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have a
>> context
>>> of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of xml.
>>> Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two or
>> five, it
>>> doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert a
context

>> of
>>> ownership; that calling a controller from the party controller has
>> some
>>> meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> good point. #1
>>>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until,

>>> you
>>>> say it become a problem
>>>>
>>>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>>>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>>>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>>>> information.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad

solution

>>>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>>>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>>> controllers will
>>>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>>> <include>
>>>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>>>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view
>> out
>>> is kind
>>>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>>>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic
>>> practices it's
>>>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by
>> making
>>>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if
>>> [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>>>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>>>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could
>> certainly
>>> be
>>>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still

work.

>>>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their web.xml
>>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>>> decorator.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

for those that have read christopher robin
"All I want is a little marmalade for my bread"
thanks chris have put in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1531
will comment further with what I get working in my global when done

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:28 PM:

> sorry, that should be page.startsWith("component://...")
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Chris Howe <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:16:14 PM
> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>
>
> You'll need to get put the <viewmap>@page value into the context and
> run a script in your main-decorator to determine the correct values
>
> if (page.like("component://partymgr")
> applicationMenuName = "Party";
> elseif(page.like("component://product")
> applicationMenuName="Product";
> etc
> parameters.put("applicationMenuName", applicationMenuName);
>
> then in your main-decorator, instead of having
> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu" global="true"/>
> you will have
> <set field="applicationMenuName"
> vlaue="${parameters.applicationMenuName}"/>
> etc
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:07:08 PM
> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>
>
> here is an exmple
> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu" global="true"/>
> <set field="applicationMenuLocation"
> Value="component://setup/widget/setup/MainSetupMenus.xml"
> global="true"/>
>
> now I can only setup that up for one menu
> so how do I set that up for each menu for each app?
>
> BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:59 PM:
>> Oh.. well I did.
>> and got all sorts of errors because I has not included what that
>> application expected for its decorator.
>>
>> and I could not find a way to use the app specific information for
> each
>> app in my main-decorator.
>>
>> which started me down the road to app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>
>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:50 PM:
>>> Woops...pressed the send button by mistake.
>>>
>>> Make your own decorator in /myapp/widget/CommonScreens.xml
>>>
>>> create a main-decorator and a global decorator and use modify to
> your heart's content
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:33:01 PM
>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>
>>>
>>> so what is the approach that works?
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:26 PM:
>>>> That's what I wasn't understanding. Your approach fails with that
>>> problem. The approach others have been using for the last two
> years does
>>> not. I thought you were asserting that both approaches fail.
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:21:55 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> been through this umteem times.
>>>> sigh
>>>> this is not the case for ftl files only widgets.
>>>>
>>>> I access a screen widget in x-app from my custom app.
>>>> that screen has a decorator which eventually looks up
>>>> mainDecoratorLocation to get the main-decorator
>>>>
>>>> so we are back to defining the mainDecoratorLocation.
>>>> I can only define one mainDecoratorLocation in my web.xml
>>>> so if I call another screen widget in y-app the information for the
>>>> x-app main-decorator will be passed causing other problems.
>>>>
>>>> So there is no way a mainDecoratorLocation can be globally declared
>>> to
>>>> use more than one application screen widgets from the custom app
>>>> So there is no use for using the mainDecoratorLocation outside that
>>> app
>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:11 PM:
>>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps
> from
>>>> a custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion that
>>>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have a
>>> context
>>>> of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of xml.
>>>> Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two or
>>> five, it
>>>> doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert a
> context
>>> of
>>>> ownership; that calling a controller from the party controller has
>>> some
>>>> meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> good point. #1
>>>>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until,
> as
>>>> you
>>>>> say it become a problem
>>>>>
>>>>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>>>>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>>>>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>>>>> information.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>>>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad
> solution
>>>>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>>>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>>>>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>>>> controllers will
>>>>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>>>> <include>
>>>>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>>>>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view
>>> out
>>>> is kind
>>>>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>>>>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic
>>>> practices it's
>>>>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>>>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by
>>> making
>>>>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if
>>>> [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>>>>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>>>>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could
>>> certainly
>>>> be
>>>>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>>>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still
> work.
>>>>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their web.xml
>>>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>>>> decorator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by cjhowe

ah gee just found a flaw
the <viewmap>@page value into the context
does that go into the products or application controller.
will that create a backward compatibility problem?

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:28 PM:

cjhowe

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by cjhowe

It's already in the controller.

<view-map name="main" type="screen" page="component://content/widget/CommonScreens.xml#main"/>
You need to update the servlet that when it reads where to go, that it puts that value of page into the context. Then your decorator can pull it out.

----- Original Message ----
From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:39:46 PM
Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

ah gee just found a flaw
the <viewmap>@page value into the context
does that go into the products or application controller.
will that create a backward compatibility problem?

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:28 PM:

global="true"/>

> you will have
> <set field="applicationMenuName"
> vlaue="${parameters.applicationMenuName}"/>
> etc
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:07:08 PM
> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>
>
> here is an exmple
> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu"

global="true"/>

> <set field="applicationMenuLocation"
> Value="component://setup/widget/setup/MainSetupMenus.xml"
> global="true"/>
>
> now I can only setup that up for one menu
> so how do I set that up for each menu for each app?
>
> BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:59 PM:
>> Oh.. well I did.
>> and got all sorts of errors because I has not included what that
>> application expected for its decorator.
>>
>> and I could not find a way to use the app specific information for
> each
>> app in my main-decorator.
>>
>> which started me down the road to app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>
>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:50 PM:
>>> Woops...pressed the send button by mistake.
>>>
>>> Make your own decorator in /myapp/widget/CommonScreens.xml
>>>
>>> create a main-decorator and a global decorator and use modify to
> your heart's content
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:33:01 PM
>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>
>>>
>>> so what is the approach that works?
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:26 PM:
>>>> That's what I wasn't understanding. Your approach fails with that
>>> problem. The approach others have been using for the last two
> years does
>>> not. I thought you were asserting that both approaches fail.
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:21:55 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> been through this umteem times.
>>>> sigh
>>>> this is not the case for ftl files only widgets.
>>>>
>>>> I access a screen widget in x-app from my custom app.
>>>> that screen has a decorator which eventually looks up
>>>> mainDecoratorLocation to get the main-decorator
>>>>
>>>> so we are back to defining the mainDecoratorLocation.
>>>> I can only define one mainDecoratorLocation in my web.xml
>>>> so if I call another screen widget in y-app the information for

the
>>>> x-app main-decorator will be passed causing other problems.
>>>>
>>>> So there is no way a mainDecoratorLocation can be globally
declared
>>> to
>>>> use more than one application screen widgets from the custom app
>>>> So there is no use for using the mainDecoratorLocation outside
that
>>> app
>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:11 PM:
>>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps
> from
>>>> a custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion
that
>>>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have
a
>>> context
>>>> of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of xml.
>>>> Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two
or
>>> five, it
>>>> doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert a
> context
>>> of
>>>> ownership; that calling a controller from the party controller
has

>>> some
>>>> meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> good point. #1
>>>>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until,
> as
>>>> you
>>>>> say it become a problem
>>>>>
>>>>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>>>>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>>>>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>>>>> information.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>>>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad
> solution
>>>>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>>>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>>>>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>>>> controllers will
>>>>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>>>> <include>
>>>>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>>>>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view
>>> out
>>>> is kind
>>>>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>>>>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic
>>>> practices it's
>>>>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>>>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by
>>> making
>>>>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if
>>>> [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>>>>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>>>>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could
>>> certainly
>>>> be
>>>>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>>>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still
> work.
>>>>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their

web.xml

>>>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>>>> decorator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

duh.... guess I need a nap..
you right .
:)

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:44 PM:

> It's already in the controller.
>
> <view-map name="main" type="screen" page="component://content/widget/CommonScreens.xml#main"/>
> You need to update the servlet that when it reads where to go, that it puts that value of page into the context. Then your decorator can pull it out.
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:39:46 PM
> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>
>
> ah gee just found a flaw
> the <viewmap>@page value into the context
> does that go into the products or application controller.
> will that create a backward compatibility problem?
>
>
>
> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:28 PM:
>> sorry, that should be page.startsWith("component://...")
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Chris Howe <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:16:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>
>>
>> You'll need to get put the <viewmap>@page value into the context and
>> run a script in your main-decorator to determine the correct values
>>
>> if (page.like("component://partymgr")
>> applicationMenuName = "Party";
>> elseif(page.like("component://product")
>> applicationMenuName="Product";
>> etc
>> parameters.put("applicationMenuName", applicationMenuName);
>>
>> then in your main-decorator, instead of having
>> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu"
> global="true"/>
>> you will have
>> <set field="applicationMenuName"
>> vlaue="${parameters.applicationMenuName}"/>
>> etc
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:07:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>
>>
>> here is an exmple
>> <set field="applicationMenuName" value="SetupMainMenu"
> global="true"/>
>> <set field="applicationMenuLocation"
>> Value="component://setup/widget/setup/MainSetupMenus.xml"
>> global="true"/>
>>
>> now I can only setup that up for one menu
>> so how do I set that up for each menu for each app?
>>
>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:59 PM:
>>> Oh.. well I did.
>>> and got all sorts of errors because I has not included what that
>>> application expected for its decorator.
>>>
>>> and I could not find a way to use the app specific information for
>> each
>>> app in my main-decorator.
>>>
>>> which started me down the road to app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>
>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:50 PM:
>>>> Woops...pressed the send button by mistake.
>>>>
>>>> Make your own decorator in /myapp/widget/CommonScreens.xml
>>>>
>>>> create a main-decorator and a global decorator and use modify to
>> your heart's content
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:33:01 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> so what is the approach that works?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:26 PM:
>>>>> That's what I wasn't understanding. Your approach fails with that
>>>> problem. The approach others have been using for the last two
>> years does
>>>> not. I thought you were asserting that both approaches fail.
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:21:55 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> been through this umteem times.
>>>>> sigh
>>>>> this is not the case for ftl files only widgets.
>>>>>
>>>>> I access a screen widget in x-app from my custom app.
>>>>> that screen has a decorator which eventually looks up
>>>>> mainDecoratorLocation to get the main-decorator
>>>>>
>>>>> so we are back to defining the mainDecoratorLocation.
>>>>> I can only define one mainDecoratorLocation in my web.xml
>>>>> so if I call another screen widget in y-app the information for
> the
>>>>> x-app main-decorator will be passed causing other problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> So there is no way a mainDecoratorLocation can be globally
> declared
>>>> to
>>>>> use more than one application screen widgets from the custom app
>>>>> So there is no use for using the mainDecoratorLocation outside
> that
>>>> app
>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 3:11 PM:
>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps
>> from
>>>>> a custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion
> that
>>>>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have
> a
>>>> context
>>>>> of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of xml.
>>>>> Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two
> or
>>>> five, it
>>>>> doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert a
>> context
>>>> of
>>>>> ownership; that calling a controller from the party controller
> has
>>>> some
>>>>> meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> good point. #1
>>>>>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until,
>> as
>>>>> you
>>>>>> say it become a problem
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>>>>>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>>>>>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>>>>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad
>> solution
>>>>>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>>>>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>>>>>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>>>>> controllers will
>>>>>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>>>>> <include>
>>>>>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>>>>>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view
>>>> out
>>>>> is kind
>>>>>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>>>>>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic
>>>>> practices it's
>>>>>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>>>>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by
>>>> making
>>>>>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if
>>>>> [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>>>>>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>>>>>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could
>>>> certainly
>>>>> be
>>>>>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>>>>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>>>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still
>> work.
>>>>>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their
> web.xml
>>>>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>>>>> decorator.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

cjhowe

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by cjhowe

more specifically...
RequestHandler.java
after line 608
add:
req.setAttribute("_NEXT_PAGE", nextPage);

----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Howe <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:44:43 PM
Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

It's already in the controller.

<view-map name="main" type="screen"
page="component://content/widget/CommonScreens.xml#main"/>
You need to update the servlet that when it reads where to go, that it
puts that value of page into the context. Then your decorator can pull
it out.

----- Original Message ----
From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:39:46 PM
Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

ah gee just found a flaw
the <viewmap>@page value into the context
does that go into the products or application controller.
will that create a backward compatibility problem?

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:28 PM:

global="true"/>

web.xml

>>>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>>>> decorator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

mainDecoratorLocation is broken and does not work as designed. was mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by cjhowe

Sorry I can't leave this alone.
but every reason I have been given I have shown it can not work the way
it was intended. to allow custom apps to give a a new main-decorator to
an already existing app.

So either some more work has to be done on it, like what scott has
proposed,
Adopt a simple solution.
rename the mainDecoratorLocation to applicationname-mainDecoratorLocation
or add applicationname-mainDecoratorLocation to the context as well.
maybe add some lines in the screens that say if
applicationname-mainDecoratorLocation is not null use
mainDecoratorLocation=applicationname-mainDecoratorLocation
this would take care of backward compatibility

I am wondering how many are actually using this feature and how.

Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 4:44 PM:

jonwimp

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by Adrian Crum

That would mean changing the original screen widgets, possibly scores of them, to use "component
URLs". If I understand you correctly by "screen's URL"...

Jonathon

Adrian Crum wrote:

> If all BJ wants to do is display an existing screen with its existing
> main decorator, then he can just use the screen's URL.
>
> Chris Howe wrote:
>
>> Because he wants screens from the party component to be decorated with
>> the mainDecoratorLocation defined in
>> party/webapp/partymgr/WEB-INF/web.xml and screens from the product
>> compnent decorated with the mainDecoratorLocation defined in
>> product/webapp/catalog/WEB-INF/web.xml
>>
>> Adrian's solution doesn't appear to solve this problem for BJ. (I had
>> misread the details of his explanation in saying that it had
>> previously). BJ requires a custom servlet that will do something like
>> the following:
>>
>> 1) process as normal until it begins to process the view
>> 2) place the <view-map>@page attribute into the context (split the
>> screen ${screen} from the location${location})
>> 3) render the following screen
>>
>> <screen name="customScreen">
>> <section>
>> <actions>
>> 
>> </actions>
>> <widget>
>> <include-screen name="${screen}" location="${location}"/>
>> </widget>
>> </section>
>> </screen>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Scott Gray <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:27:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>
>>
>> Why couldn't you supply your own custom mainDecorator? What do the
>> base
>> mainDecorators provide that you can't in your custom app?
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> On 18/12/2007, BJ Freeman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Based on this, I can never see how even if I called from a custom app
>>> different screens in different apps how one main-decorator
>>> so I am not sure how this feature would work at all.
>>>
>>> Hence my original suggestion that is apps main-decorator be declared
>>
>> as
>>
>>> application-mainDecoratorLocation
>>> this way I could include each apps mainDecoratorLocation and not have
>>
>> to
>>
>>> worry
>>>
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/17/2007 12:55 PM:
>>>
>>>> I have a menu, no screens, that calls ListPartyCommEvents
>>>> this goes to the party controller to resolve.
>>>> the party controller uses it view for ListPartyCommEvents
>>>> It can not read the party web.xml so will error even with your
>>
>> changes.
>>
>>>> so lets say i put in a mainDecoratorLocation in my web xml and
>>
>> define it
>>
>>>> like the one in the party commonscreens.xml
>>>>
>>>> so far so good.
>>>>
>>>> Now I call a screen in say Product. except the
>>
>> mainDecoratorLocation for
>>
>>>> it has a different main-decorator. so all the requirements are not
>>>> defined in the party main-Decorator I have ported over.
>>>>
>>>> we still have a problem since all the apps main-decorators are not
>>
>> the
>>
>>> same.
>>>
>>>> now if the main-decorators were all the same then I could use one
>>>> location in any of the apps and everything would be ok
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Adrian Crum sent the following on 12/17/2007 12:40 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> 1. Move the CommonCommunicationEventDecorator screen to the
>>>>> communicationsscreens.xml file.
>>>>> 2. Change all
>>>>> <decorator-screen name="CommonCommunicationEventDecorator"
>>>>> location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}">
>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>> <decorator-screen name="CommonCommunicationEventDecorator"
>>>>> location="${parameters.communicationEventDecoratorLocation}">
>>>>>
>>>>> Since parameters.communicationEventDecoratorLocation isn't defined
>>>>> anywhere, the location will evaluate to the current file:
>>>>> communicationsscreens.xml. All communication screens still work
>>
>> the
>>
>>> same
>>>
>>>>> in Party Manager, but now you can reuse those screens in another
>>
>> app.
>>
>>>>> When you use one of the communication screens in your custom app
>>
>> (via
>>
>>>>> included controller.xml file or otherwise) the
>>>>> parameters.communicationEventDecoratorLocation still isn't defined
>>>>> anywhere, so it still evaluates to the current file:
>>>>> communicationsscreens.xml. The communication screen and the
>>>>> CommonCommunicationEventDecorator will both appear - decorated
>>
>> with
>>
>>> your
>>>
>>>>> custom app's main decorator.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Optional) If someone didn't like the
>>>
>>> CommonCommunicationEventDecorator,
>>>
>>>>> then they could design their own and specify its location in
>>>>> parameters.communicationEventDecoratorLocation.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>
>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok here is a real situation:
>>>>>> take the party/widgets/partymgr/commicationsscreens.xml
>>>>>> <decorator-screen name="CommonCommunicationEventDecorator"
>>>>>> location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}">
>>>>>> which is the CommonSreens.xml
>>>>>> which has
>>>>>> <decorator-screen name="main-decorator"
>>>>>> location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}">
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the main-decorator has
>>>>>> <include-screen name="GlobalDecorator"
>>>>>> location="component://common/widget/CommonScreens.xml"/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> how would the be with your example
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adrian Crum sent the following on 12/17/2007 9:33 AM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BJ,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Go ahead and create one. I will work on it when I have time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To be sure we're all on the same page, the problem exists when
>>>
>>> screens
>>>
>>>>>>> are nested as follows:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <screen name="GlobalDecorator">
>>>>>>> <screen name="main-decorator">
>>>>>>> <screen name="sub-decorator">
>>>>>>> <screen name="actual-content">
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> </screen>
>>>>>>> </screen>
>>>>>>> </screen>
>>>>>>> </screen>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and the location of the sub-decorator screen is defined as
>>>>>>> ${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}. When a custom app tries to
>>
>> reuse
>>
>>>>>>> the actual-content screen, errors are generated because
>>>>>>> <decorator-screen name="sub-decorator"
>>>>>>> location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}"> evaluates to the
>>>
>>> custom
>>>
>>>>>>> app's main decorator xml file, and the sub-decorator screen
>>
>> doesn't
>>
>>>>>>> exist there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The solution to the problem is to avoid using
>>>>>>> ${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation} as a location for
>>
>> sub-decorators
>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>>>>> either have no location specified or use a different parameter
>>
>> for
>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>> sub-decorator's location - like ${subDecoratorLocation}.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A good example of this approach is in AgreementScreens.xml in
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>> Accounting component. All of the Agreement screens share a
>>
>> common
>>
>>>>>>> sub-decorator (CommonAgreementDecorator) - and that decorator's
>>>
>>> location
>>>
>>>>>>> is specified as ${parameters.agreementDecoratorLocation}. The
>>>>>>> agreementDecoratorLocation parameter isn't defined anywhere, so
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>> location= expression evaluates to an empty String - which causes
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>> screen widget view handler to look for CommonAgreementDecorator
>>
>> in
>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>> existing file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A custom app that reuses one of the Agreement screens will only
>>
>> need
>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>>>>> specify the mainDecoratorLocation parameter. Since no
>>>>>>> agreementDecoratorLocation parameter is defined in the custom
>>
>> app,
>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>> sub-decorator in AgreementScreens.xml is used (same as above).
>>
>> If a
>>
>>>>>>> custom app wanted to have a custom sub-decorator, then it can
>>
>> specify
>>
>>>>>>> that decorator's location in the agreementDecoratorLocation
>>>
>>> parameter.
>>>
>>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree, it is not a controller or web.xml issue. However it is
>>
>> when
>>
>>> it
>>>
>>>>>>>> shows up.
>>>>>>>> I will change them as I come along also.
>>>>>>>> thanks, that is all I wanted to know.
>>>>>>>> do you want to create a jira so I can submit changes?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Adrian Crum sent the following on 12/17/2007 7:57 AM:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As I mentioned before, the problem is with the coding style on
>>
>> some
>>
>>>>>>>>> screens, not with the controller or web.xml files. I recently
>>>
>>> changed
>>>
>>>>>>>>> some of the accounting screens to correct this error.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am not really, trying to attach the context as a whole.
>>>>>>>>>> only trying to get the mainDecoratorLocation
>>>>>>>>>> which is stored as a context in web.xml.
>>>>>>>>>> The problem is if I put mainDecoratorLocation, in my web.xml
>>>>>>>>>> then all applications I call thru my controller, or the
>>
>> included
>>
>>>>>>>>>> ones,
>>>>>>>>>> will use my mainDecoratorLocation full path.
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe the solution is to put the main-decorator for all apps
>>
>> in
>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> framework/commons
>>>>>>>>>> then like in many of the application they have specific
>>
>> decorators
>>
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> include the main-decorator.
>>>>>>>>>> the problems is how to fill in the actions, etcetera
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/15/2007 10:40 AM:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All the <include> does is grab some xml elements from the
>>>
>>> location
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> described. Theoretically, It doesn't even need to be from
>>
>> the
>>
>>> same
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> server, much less the same app (may have interesting
>>>
>>> possibilities
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BTW). This is why I'm having such a hard time understanding
>>
>> why
>>
>>> you
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> are trying to attach context to it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:19:27 PM
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Include of controllers
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I was going thru the trunk and noticed this in all the
>>>
>>> controllers
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <include
>>>>>>>>>>> location="component://common/webcommon/WEB-INF/common-
>>>
>>> controller.xml"/>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> so there is a rule that says you can include a controller
>>
>> not in
>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> same app.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 11/10/2007 4:15 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Almost.
>>>>>>>>>>>> when the included controller view calles a screen in the
>>>
>>> partymgr
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> screen
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> , and that screen calls for a parm that is web.xml. the
>>
>> parm is
>>
>>> not
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> availible for the screen and so fails.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> At this time, the way I handle this is to put the parm in
>>
>> my
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Web.xml.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> My suggestions was that if a call is made to a parm that
>>
>> would
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> be in
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> applications, in this case partymgr, web.xml, that widget
>>
>> looks
>>
>>> up
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> web.xml for that application to get it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 11/10/2007 2:23 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay, I've read through the thread. In that case, I might
>>>
>>> suggest
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> to take a step back and look at what the two functionalities
>>
>> were
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> designed to accomplish.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Creating the mainDecoratorLocation variable in the web.xml
>>
>> was
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> designed for _screen reuse. the include element in the
>>>>>>>>>>> controller.xml
>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>> was designed for request/response maintenance.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> With that in mind, you can include another controller in
>>
>> your
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> custom
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> application and then override the view with one that points
>>
>> to
>>
>>> your
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> application. If you wish to then include a screen from
>>
>> another
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> application you can use the <include-screen> element in the
>>>
>>> screen
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> widget and
>>>>>>>>>>> at the same time pass a parameters.mainDecoratorLocation to
>>>>>>>>>>> override the
>>>>>>>>>>> one gained from the web.xml context of the webapp being
>>
>> used.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It appears that what BJ is suggesting would make the
>>
>> screen
>>
>>> being
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> called from the ofbiz application nonreusable except as
>>
>> decorated
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> as it
>>>>>>>>>>> is in the ofbiz project which defeats the entire purpose of
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> mainDecoratorLocation variable. Do I follow correctly?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 2:12:12 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Include of controllers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris the discussion is about using the include in the
>>>
>>> controller.
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that the current way of putting the locations of
>>
>> parameters
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the widgets for screen decorators is causing a problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a lot of apps the location is called out in the web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <context-param>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <param-name>mainDecoratorLocation</param-name>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> <param-value>component://party/widget/partymgr/CommonScreens.xml</param-value>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <description>The location of the main-decorator screen
>>
>> to use
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this webapp; referred to as a context variable in screen
>>
>> def
>>
>>> XML
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> files.</description>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> </context-param>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The suggeston is to take the location out to the web.xml
>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> put in
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> widget like so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <decorator-screen name="CommonPartyDecorator"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>> location="component://party/widget/partymgr/CommonScreens.xml">
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 11/9/2007 9:14 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't been following the thread, but instead of
>>
>> setting it
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly in the widgets section, you may prefer to
>>
>> define it
>>
>>> in
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the actions
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> section...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <action>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <set field="parameters.mainDecoratorLocation"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> value="component://party/widget/partymgr/CommonScreens.xml"/>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </action>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <widget>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <include-screen name="splitScreen"/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </widget>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <decorator-screen name="CommonPartyDecorator"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <screen name="splitScreen">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <widget>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </widget>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or something similar that it remains a variable so that
>>
>> you
>>
>>> can
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> later
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> split the widget section out to be it's own screen so that
>>
>> it
>>
>>> can
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> used with the decorator in another webapp. I don't know
>>
>> if the
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> screens
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're worried about here are that complex. This has
>>
>> been a
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> pattern for me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, November 9, 2007 9:57:00 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Include of controllers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just want to make sure we are all on the same page
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a widget screen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <decorator-screen
>>
>> name="CommonPartyDecorator"
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}">
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parameters.mainDecoratorLocation is in the Web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <context-param>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <param-name>mainDecoratorLocation</param-name>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> <param-value>component://party/widget/partymgr/CommonScreens.xml</param-value>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <description>The location of the main-decorator screen
>>
>> to use
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this webapp; referred to as a context variable in screen
>>
>> def
>>
>>> XML
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> files.</description>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> </context-param>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so to "fix"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <decorator-screen
>>
>> name="CommonPartyDecorator"
>>
>>> location="component://party/widget/partymgr/CommonScreens.xml">
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 11/9/2007 5:17 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok so the code that allows the context to be used in the
>>>
>>> web.xml
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being depreciated?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adrian Crum sent the following on 11/9/2007 5:11 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nothing is being reversed. You have pointed out a
>>
>> weakness
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in how
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some of the party manager screens are set up (they
>>
>> can't be
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reused).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have confirmed they have a problem. So submitting a
>>
>> patch
>>
>>> FIXES
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issue - it doesn't reverse anything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will not submit a patch for what I am proposing,
>>
>> like a
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lot of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code, it stays in the applications I am doing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and since someone else put effort into what is in
>>
>> ofbiz now
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do not plan to put effort into reversing it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adrian Crum sent the following on 11/9/2007 4:57 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I mentioned before, I believe it would be
>>
>> better/easier
>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> party manager screens. Including web.xml files will
>>
>> open
>>
>>> up a
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> big
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worms.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hans:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not put the CommonCommunicationEventDecorator
>>>
>>> location
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> context in web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this was done by someone else and is a standard
>>
>> through
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ofbiz
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> far as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i can tell.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I take the path of least resistance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since it is possible to put context in the web.xml
>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> put a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lot of effort into refactoring ofbiz to this
>>
>> standard, I
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intention of undoing it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so my focus for my code will be to have the
>>
>> web.xmlincluded
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unless the powers to be say there is going to be a
>>
>> change
>>
>>> in
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practices.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hans Bakker sent the following on 11/7/2007 5:47 PM:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Bj,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request (or provide a patch) that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CommonCommunicationEventDecorator
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is moved to the xml file as defined in the web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parameter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> request that the 'location' parameter is defined in
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> screen
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then you can use this screen in your own
>>
>> application
>>
>>> using
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decorator.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hans
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 13:42 -0800, BJ Freeman
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a controller.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it has the include for the partymgr in it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a menu widget that calls the partmgr
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have the PartymgrDecoratorLocation in my web.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I get to the find screen OK.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a few others in my web.xml as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I can navigate.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> however if you don't have these in your web.xml
>>
>> that is
>>
>>> in
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directory as the controller.xml you are using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://localhost:8443/myapp/control/partymgr
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then you get messages like this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> org.ofbiz.base.util.GeneralException: Error
>>
>> rendering
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> [component://party/widget/partymgr/CommunicationScreens.xml#EditCommunicationEvent]:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Could not find
>>>
>>> screen
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [CommonCommunicationEventDecorator] in the same
>>
>> file as
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name [EditCommunicationEvent] (Could not find
>>
>> screen
>>
>>> with
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> name
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [CommonCommunicationEventDecorator] in the same
>>
>> file as
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> name [EditCommunicationEvent])
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have any specific examples of what you're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> describing?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 11/5/2007 3:59
>>
>> PM:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sorry not a complete thougt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is not a real bug.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you included another contorller
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and there is a commonscreen.xml defined in the
>>
>> web.xmlof
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> calling
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> controller application it causes an error.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so maybe puttting the application name before
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> commonescreens
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eliminate that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BJ Freeman sent the following on 11/5/2007 3:55
>>
>> PM:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is not a real bug.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you included another contorller
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and it has a commonscreen.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another is that when the the other widget from
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> included
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> controller
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> calls for a context that is in the web.xml of
>>
>> that
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> application.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is not found.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

jonwimp

Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers

In reply to this post by cjhowe

Also in response to BJ's "been through this umteem times"...

The idea is to provide neat encapsulation for screen widgets and their required "mainDecorator"
params. Have a clean wrap around the 2.

When including (<include>) controller.xml of a component say "party", we would also be including
all the <view-map>s.

Many of those <view-map>s point to screen widgets that require a particular "mainDecorator" to work.

Consider that your custom app includes controller.xml files from more than one component. Each
component will require its own "mainDecorator".

Ideally, we would want to be able to reuse all <view-map>s and screen widgets from all included
components, without having to individually specify which "mainDecorator" to use for which <view-map>.

BJ's suggested solution is a quick hack and alternative to the ideal solution. Something we may be
able to develop quickly without desiging a full-blown space station.

Jonathon

Chris Howe wrote:

> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps from a custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion that included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have a context of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of xml. Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two or five, it doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert a context of ownership; that calling a controller from the party controller has some meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>
>
> good point. #1
> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until, as you
> say it become a problem
>
> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
> information.
>
>
>
>
> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad solution
> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple controllers will
> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the <include>
> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view out is kind
> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic practices it's
> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by making
> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could certainly be
> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>
>>
>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still work.
>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their web.xml
>> it either points to the original location or their customer
> decorator.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: mainDecoratorLocation and more Got it working

I want to give Chris Howe a big thanks for taking the time to show me my
errors.
he has a single app which does not take in to some other criteria for
accessing multiple apps.
so He did one for multiple apps.
I plan to submit the basic parts as a template patch unless someone
would rather have it in an Myapp-example

I am incorporating most of what Chris showed me in the setup app.

Jonathon -- Improov sent the following on 12/19/2007 1:06 AM:

> Also in response to BJ's "been through this umteem times"...
>
> The idea is to provide neat encapsulation for screen widgets and their
> required "mainDecorator" params. Have a clean wrap around the 2.
>
> When including (<include>) controller.xml of a component say "party", we
> would also be including all the <view-map>s.
>
> Many of those <view-map>s point to screen widgets that require a
> particular "mainDecorator" to work.
>
> Consider that your custom app includes controller.xml files from more
> than one component. Each component will require its own "mainDecorator".
>
> Ideally, we would want to be able to reuse all <view-map>s and screen
> widgets from all included components, without having to individually
> specify which "mainDecorator" to use for which <view-map>.
>
> BJ's suggested solution is a quick hack and alternative to the ideal
> solution. Something we may be able to develop quickly without desiging a
> full-blown space station.
>
> Jonathon
>
> Chris Howe wrote:
>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps from a
>> custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion that
>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have a
>> context of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of
>> xml. Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two
>> or five, it doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert
>> a context of ownership; that calling a controller from the party
>> controller has some meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>
>>
>> good point. #1
>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until, as you
>> say it become a problem
>>
>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>> information.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad solution
>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>> controllers will
>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>> <include>
>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view out
>> is kind
>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic practices
>> it's
>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by making
>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could certainly be
>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still work.
>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their web.xml
>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>> decorator.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

BJ Freeman

Re: mainDecoratorLocation and more Got it working

this should be brought over when the multiple example is done.
http://ofbizwiki.go-integral.com/Wiki.jsp?page=FAQ21

BJ Freeman sent the following on 12/19/2007 4:15 PM:

> I want to give Chris Howe a big thanks for taking the time to show me my
> errors.
> he has a single app which does not take in to some other criteria for
> accessing multiple apps.
> so He did one for multiple apps.
> I plan to submit the basic parts as a template patch unless someone
> would rather have it in an Myapp-example
>
> I am incorporating most of what Chris showed me in the setup app.
>
>
>
> Jonathon -- Improov sent the following on 12/19/2007 1:06 AM:
>> Also in response to BJ's "been through this umteem times"...
>>
>> The idea is to provide neat encapsulation for screen widgets and their
>> required "mainDecorator" params. Have a clean wrap around the 2.
>>
>> When including (<include>) controller.xml of a component say "party", we
>> would also be including all the <view-map>s.
>>
>> Many of those <view-map>s point to screen widgets that require a
>> particular "mainDecorator" to work.
>>
>> Consider that your custom app includes controller.xml files from more
>> than one component. Each component will require its own "mainDecorator".
>>
>> Ideally, we would want to be able to reuse all <view-map>s and screen
>> widgets from all included components, without having to individually
>> specify which "mainDecorator" to use for which <view-map>.
>>
>> BJ's suggested solution is a quick hack and alternative to the ideal
>> solution. Something we may be able to develop quickly without desiging a
>> full-blown space station.
>>
>> Jonathon
>>
>> Chris Howe wrote:
>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by access multiple apps from a
>>> custom app. When you have a custom app, there is no notion that
>>> included screens, called screens, included controllers, etc have a
>>> context of ownership. The custom app is simply locating snippets of
>>> xml. Nothing more. You can call snippets from one component or two
>>> or five, it doesn't matter. It only matters if you attempt to assert
>>> a context of ownership; that calling a controller from the party
>>> controller has some meaning about associated party variables or contexts.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:57:18 PM
>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>
>>>
>>> good point. #1
>>> so I will not put this to sleep and do it for my releases until, as you
>>> say it become a problem
>>>
>>> However the use of mainDecoratorLocation beyond an app should be
>>> discourage for access multiple apps from a custom app as well.
>>> the conflict of data in each main-decorator has specific app
>>> information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Howe sent the following on 12/17/2007 2:47 PM:
>>>> Note: I'm not saying that prefixing the variable is a bad solution
>>> I'm just throwing out the downsides of it
>>>> 1) The use case you present should not be encouraged. The
>>> opportunity for conflicting requests/views between multiple
>>> controllers will
>>> drive you bat crazy with unexpected results. The intent of the
>>> <include>
>>> element is to modularize commonly used requests/views. Throwing
>>> everything in a bag and hoping you pull the expected result/view out
>>> is kind
>>> of dangerous. Absent a compelling use case, movement towards an
>>> external widely adopted standard, or utilizing more generic practices
>>> it's
>>> difficult to overcome the backward compatibility issue.
>>>> 2) if you were to address the backward compatibility issue by making
>>> the mainDecoratorLocation the default if [prefix]-mainDeocratorLocation
>>> were null, I believe that you would be moving away from the Java
>>> Servlet spec by processing the context parameter. I could certainly be
>>> wrong. I'm no expert on such things.
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27:19 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: mainDecoratorLocation was Include of controllers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems a lot of work for simple solution
>>>> how about app-mainDecoratorLocation
>>>> then if someone want to use their own decorator it will still work.
>>>> they just define each app-mainDecoratorLocation in their web.xml
>>>> it either points to the original location or their customer
>>> decorator.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>