Apache Geronimo > Discussion Forums  User List | Dev List | Wiki | Issue Tracker  

admin console and prompting

View: New views
4 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  

admin console and prompting

by Jarek Gawor-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Hi,

While debugging the console testsuites I realized that the admin
console was no longer prompting when uninstalling a given module (or
stopping or restarting). I tracked down the problem to
ConfirmMessageTag.java where it was pointing to wrong locations for
Dojo resources. Now, I have a few of questions about this
ConfirmMessageTag that I'm hoping somebody will be able to answer:

1) Is it necessary for ConfirmMessageTag to use Dojo? Or at least can
we make it so that it still works (displays prompts) when Dojo is not
installed?

2) The ConfirmMessageTag injects a <style/> element into the page body
(within <body/>). But from what I can tell (and I checked this with
jslint) the <style/> elements only should appear within the <head/>
element. Things seems to work the way they are now but I'm wondering
if we should change this to be more valid.

Jarek

Re: admin console and prompting

by Ivan Xu :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

I checked the codes of ConfirmMessageTag, its main purpose is to import Dojo js file and some styles for showing Dojo box.
1. When dojo is not installed, I do not think the confirm box could work. For the showConfirmMessage function uses some Dojo components.
2. The name seems not conformable with its function. I agree that we should change it to be more valid.
Ivan

2009/6/30 Jarek Gawor <jgawor@...>
Hi,

While debugging the console testsuites I realized that the admin
console was no longer prompting when uninstalling a given module (or
stopping or restarting). I tracked down the problem to
ConfirmMessageTag.java where it was pointing to wrong locations for
Dojo resources. Now, I have a few of questions about this
ConfirmMessageTag that I'm hoping somebody will be able to answer:

1) Is it necessary for ConfirmMessageTag to use Dojo? Or at least can
we make it so that it still works (displays prompts) when Dojo is not
installed?

2) The ConfirmMessageTag injects a <style/> element into the page body
(within <body/>). But from what I can tell (and I checked this with
jslint) the <style/> elements only should appear within the <head/>
element. Things seems to work the way they are now but I'm wondering
if we should change this to be more valid.

Jarek



--
Ivan

Re: admin console and prompting

by Jarek Gawor-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

If Dojo is only used to display a nice box in this case, I think we
should just get rid off it and use the regular dialog boxes.

Jarek

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Ivan<xhhsld@...> wrote:

> I checked the codes of ConfirmMessageTag, its main purpose is to import Dojo
> js file and some styles for showing Dojo box.
> 1. When dojo is not installed, I do not think the confirm box could work.
> For the showConfirmMessage function uses some Dojo components.
> 2. The name seems not conformable with its function. I agree that we should
> change it to be more valid.
> Ivan
>
> 2009/6/30 Jarek Gawor <jgawor@...>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> While debugging the console testsuites I realized that the admin
>> console was no longer prompting when uninstalling a given module (or
>> stopping or restarting). I tracked down the problem to
>> ConfirmMessageTag.java where it was pointing to wrong locations for
>> Dojo resources. Now, I have a few of questions about this
>> ConfirmMessageTag that I'm hoping somebody will be able to answer:
>>
>> 1) Is it necessary for ConfirmMessageTag to use Dojo? Or at least can
>> we make it so that it still works (displays prompts) when Dojo is not
>> installed?
>>
>> 2) The ConfirmMessageTag injects a <style/> element into the page body
>> (within <body/>). But from what I can tell (and I checked this with
>> jslint) the <style/> elements only should appear within the <head/>
>> element. Things seems to work the way they are now but I'm wondering
>> if we should change this to be more valid.
>>
>> Jarek
>
>
>
> --
> Ivan
>

Re: admin console and prompting

by Ivan Xu :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Yes, the regular dialog boxes are also OK. I remembered that I had discussed it with the patch contributor Jeff, our final result is that since more and more portlets are using Dojo, why not use it :-)
I also wish the console would use Dojo to do some validation stuff in the future.
Ivan

2009/7/1 Jarek Gawor <jgawor@...>
If Dojo is only used to display a nice box in this case, I think we
should just get rid off it and use the regular dialog boxes.

Jarek

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Ivan<xhhsld@...> wrote:
> I checked the codes of ConfirmMessageTag, its main purpose is to import Dojo
> js file and some styles for showing Dojo box.
> 1. When dojo is not installed, I do not think the confirm box could work.
> For the showConfirmMessage function uses some Dojo components.
> 2. The name seems not conformable with its function. I agree that we should
> change it to be more valid.
> Ivan
>
> 2009/6/30 Jarek Gawor <jgawor@...>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> While debugging the console testsuites I realized that the admin
>> console was no longer prompting when uninstalling a given module (or
>> stopping or restarting). I tracked down the problem to
>> ConfirmMessageTag.java where it was pointing to wrong locations for
>> Dojo resources. Now, I have a few of questions about this
>> ConfirmMessageTag that I'm hoping somebody will be able to answer:
>>
>> 1) Is it necessary for ConfirmMessageTag to use Dojo? Or at least can
>> we make it so that it still works (displays prompts) when Dojo is not
>> installed?
>>
>> 2) The ConfirmMessageTag injects a <style/> element into the page body
>> (within <body/>). But from what I can tell (and I checked this with
>> jslint) the <style/> elements only should appear within the <head/>
>> element. Things seems to work the way they are now but I'm wondering
>> if we should change this to be more valid.
>>
>> Jarek
>
>
>
> --
> Ivan
>



--
Ivan