mla ha scritto:
I just finished getting the tutorial project working.
The thing I'm not clear on is this separation between lib/MyAppDB/
and lib/MyApp/Model/
The tutorial says:
With Catalyst::Model::DBIC::Schema you essentially end up with two sets
of model classes (only one of which you
Marcello Romani wrote:
In MyApp/Model I usually have only MyAppDB.pm, which role is to expose
the DBIC::Schema classes under MyAppDB/ as a catalyst model.
This doesn't mean however that I would never create anything else. If
all I need is one dbic schema, then the answer to your question is
lib/MyAppDB is where you define your schema (your relations etc.) and
lib/MyAppDB/Model is where you'd use them.
The latest long discussion on where your model should be is basically if
your model is only fixed to the web application (blog etc), whack your model in
lib/MyAppDB/Model. If,
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:52:25PM +1000, Steve H wrote:
Hi
A couple of Login/authentication questions:
As expected, when using frames, when a session times out and displays the
Login page, it does so in the frame that is the target for that request.
Is there any easy trick to be able to
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 06:22:36PM -0700, mla wrote:
All the real models live in lib/MyAppDB? And if I wanted to use a
model *outside* catalyst, I'd use MyAppDB::Book, but within
catalyst it would be MyApp::Book?
well, $c-model('MyApp::Book') if your DBIC::Schema was Model::MyApp.
Is this
Anthony Gardner wrote:
Have a look at this for another angle
http://www.teambarry.com/?p=38
Ah, I like this approach very much.
It says:
So how do you get some of the advantages of ORM and keep control over
SQL? I employ composition and a couple basic design patterns. For
example, I have
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:19:53AM -0700, mla wrote:
So how do you get some of the advantages of ORM and keep control over
SQL? I employ composition and a couple basic design patterns. For
example, I have a base model factory interface that uses chainable
“Loader” modules (ie, DBILoader,
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:10:15AM -0700, mla wrote:
But I'm thinking a better layout would be:
/lib
./lib/Try
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Model
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Model/DB.pm
./lib/Try/Catalyst/View
./lib/Try/Catalyst/View/TT.pm
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Controller
A couple of Login/authentication questions:
As expected, when using frames, when a session times out and displays
the
Login page, it does so in the frame that is the target for that request.
Is there any easy trick to be able to get that Login screen to use
'_top'
as the target? perhaps
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:10:15AM -0700, mla wrote:
But I'm thinking a better layout would be:
/lib
./lib/Try
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Model
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Model/DB.pm
./lib/Try/Catalyst/View
./lib/Try/Catalyst/View/TT.pm
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Controller
[info] Registration powered by Catalyst 5.7007
fork: Cannot allocate memory
unable to fork new process
You've ran out of memory!
Might be worth watching top/task manager in another window whilst you try to
startup to see what's going on memory wise.
Carl
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:19:53AM -0700, mla wrote:
So how do you get some of the advantages of ORM and keep control over
SQL? I employ composition and a couple basic design patterns. For
example, I have a base model factory interface that uses chainable
“Loader” modules
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 08:06:01PM +1000, Steve H wrote:
window.parent.location =
Given the response already has it's target window, the Login screen will
just get rendered there. I was thinking of a solution that maybe writes an
intermediary response page that onLoad() sets the location
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
I find the Rails ActiveRecord interface pretty appealing:
http://ar.rubyonrails.com/classes/ActiveRecord/Base.html
DBIC's interface is not dissimilar although it favours data structures
for query descriptions rather than raw SQL.
I
On 5/14/07, Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
eval
{
$user-update( %bunch_of_stuff );
};
if ( my $e = Exception::Class-caught( 'My::App::Exception::DataValidation') )
{
# $e-errors contains multiple data validation error messages
# stuff them in the session
I would like to test a model with a unit test. Catalyst kindly
generates stub unit tests for models, but it does not include a stub
showing how to instantiate the context object.
I have looked at:
- http://dev.catalystframework.org/wiki/Testing#ModelTests
(Examples of test for your model:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:24:17PM +0100, Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
I like how if you fetch columns that don't exist in the table
the object becomes read-only by default.
That's neat, although I prefer tools that presume I know that I'm doing.
--- Matt S Trout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
I find the Rails ActiveRecord interface pretty
appealing:
http://ar.rubyonrails.com/classes/ActiveRecord/Base.html
DBIC's interface is not dissimilar although it
favours data structures
--- Matt S Trout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:10:15AM -0700, mla wrote:
But I'm thinking a better layout would be:
/lib
./lib/Try
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Model
./lib/Try/Catalyst/Model/DB.pm
./lib/Try/Catalyst/View
./lib/Try/Catalyst/View/TT.pm
Thats odd, since I have 256MB of memory (not a ton, but should be enough).
On other box with a slightly older version of apache (2.0.55) it works fine,
except my second question was never answered-- I still need a full path in
the validator config settings. Maybe I can define some path in my
John Goulah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/15/2007 10:03:59 AM:
Thats odd, since I have 256MB of memory (not a ton, but should be
enough). On other box with a slightly older version of apache (2.0.
55) it works fine, except my second question was never answered-- I
still need a full path
Its linux, and yeah I know its not much for a production box, these are
basically standalone machines (laptops) to take to events that one person at
a time would use to sign up through a web form. I would assume 256 MB is
enough to start apache. I assume mod_perl has been tested and runs fine
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:03:59AM -0400, John Goulah wrote:
Thats odd, since I have 256MB of memory (not a ton, but should be enough).
On other box with a slightly older version of apache (2.0.55) it works fine,
except my second question was never answered-- I still need a full path in
the
* Steve H [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-15 05:00]:
Is there any easy trick to be able to get that Login screen to
use '_top' as the target?
Not directly, but you can use Javascript as Matt wrote.
For completeness’ sake (although not applicable in your
particular case), note that such code can
Following up, I dropped another 256 MB chip in there and apache started up
ok. Guess I was wrong :-)
Matt, thanks for the advice on ConfigLoader, much appreciated-
Thanks!
John
On 5/15/07, Matt S Trout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:03:59AM -0400, John Goulah wrote:
On 5/15/07, John Goulah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would assume 256 MB is enough to start apache.
It is. Apache's memory requirements are pretty light and mod_perl
doesn't have much overhead either. It's really the perl interpreter
and the code you're loading that matters, as well as
Hi all,
A few months ago (err... 7), I pushed Catalyst::View::MicroMason
0.04_01 to the CPAN (with some fixes people wanted). I never got any
feedback on this version, so I haven't made it stable yet. If
you're a MicroMason user, please try it and tell me what problems you
encounter. If it's
Hi all,
I have more than just MicroMason views :) While I was at the YAPC::Asia
hackathon last month, I was around a bunch of Jifty people and decided
to write Catalyst::View::Template::Declare. If you're not familiar with
TD, it's a module for writing HTML templates in Perl:
template foo
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 09:48:05AM -0400, Nathan Gray wrote:
Does anyone have an example unit test that has access to $c?
As others have mentioned, this is probably a sign of a poorly designed
API. If you decide to continue further, you'll probably want to use
Test::MockObject to setup a fake
Hi.
I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on what a good way to deploy
many (2-10, nothing extreme; different) Catalyst-based apps on a
single machine would be.
My first thought was that mod_perl perhaps in this case would be
preferable to FastCGI, because each process then would share
Sorry for the ignorance, but the docs are somewhat lacking good examples.
It doesn't seem I can use the $c object in the main app file
(lib/Appname.pm). I've tried stuff like __path_to_(myconfig.yml)__ and that
throws compile errors. So how would I change this statement to do what I
need:
Hi Dmitri,
there was indeed not long ago a good article in the Ix. It cost 0,60
Euro which is quite fair and i found it quit usefull.
http://www.heise.de/kiosk/archiv/ix/07/01/116_Auf_dem_Gleis
yours Johannes
Dmitri Pissarenko schrieb:
Hello!
Are there any introductory materials for
Perrin Harkins wrote:
On 5/14/07, Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
eval
{
$user-update( %bunch_of_stuff );
};
if ( my $e = Exception::Class-caught(
'My::App::Exception::DataValidation') )
{
# $e-errors contains multiple data validation error messages
# stuff
where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Fail Early. Fail Often.
Some will say redundancy sucks. I agree, except for where validation is
concerned. If you're writing data from the web into a model, check the
data at the page level, and at
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:22:25PM -0400, John Goulah wrote:
Sorry for the ignorance, but the docs are somewhat lacking good examples.
It doesn't seem I can use the $c object in the main app file
(lib/Appname.pm). I've tried stuff like __path_to_(myconfig.yml)__ and that
throws compile
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 11:42:52AM -0700, mla wrote:
And where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Controller only in my case. There could be extra validation in the
ORM, and of course in the database.
Could you give a short example of
On 5/15/07, mla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
In the form processing code. This system has a CMS where users get to
generate forms and decide which fields will be on specific forms, so
the required
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 06:52:06PM +0200, Adam Sjøgren wrote:
I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on what a good way to deploy
many (2-10, nothing extreme; different) Catalyst-based apps on a
single machine would be.
My first thought was that mod_perl perhaps in this case would be
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:51:18PM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Fail Early. Fail Often.
Some will say redundancy sucks. I agree, except for where validation is
concerned. If you're
Daniel Hulme wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:24:17PM +0100, Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
I like how if you fetch columns that don't exist in the table
the object becomes read-only by default.
That's neat, although I prefer tools that presume I
mla scribbled on 05/15/07 13:42:
Perrin Harkins wrote:
And where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Could you give a short example of taking an actual field from the
request parameters, validating it, and updating a row with it?
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
So with that design you'd get the centralized validation, which
is most critical to me, but then you could use SQL freely
and get back a collection of read-only active record objects
if you did fancy stuff.
You -can-
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:37:57PM -0700, mla wrote:
Daniel Hulme wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:24:17PM +0100, Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
I like how if you fetch columns that don't exist in the table
the object becomes read-only by default.
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:51:18PM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Fail Early. Fail Often.
Some will say redundancy sucks. I agree, except for where validation is
concerned.
mla wrote:
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:51:18PM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Fail Early. Fail Often.
Some will say redundancy sucks. I agree, except for where validation =
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
mla wrote:
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:51:18PM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
where do you handle the validation? Only in the controller or in
both the model and controller?
Fail Early. Fail Often.
Some will say redundancy sucks. I agree,
Matt S Trout wrote:
Or you could stuff 'em all in one fcgi handler with something like -
package DummyApp;
use Catalyst;
__PACKAGE__-setup;
my %rev_apps = (
MyApp = 'myapp.example.com',
MyOtherApp = 'other.example.com,
);
my %apps = reverse %rev_apps;
foreach my $app (values %apps) {
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:21:01AM +0200, Florian Ragwitz wrote:
As no one really cared so far I just set up a repository for
Catalyst::View::Mason at
git://git.perldition.org/Catalyst-View-Mason.git
with a gitweb interface at
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:32:31PM +0100, Matt Lawrence wrote:
Nathan Gray wrote:
I would like to test a model with a unit test. Catalyst kindly
generates stub unit tests for models, but it does not include a stub
showing how to instantiate the context object.
I think I mentioned this
Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Damned if you do... damned if you don't. There is no one correct answer.
So true ;-|
In terms of form validation, what do you guys think of this
interface? It uses perl to handle conditional logic/dependencies
instead of using a spec language like
On 5/15/07, Ian Docherty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What would you suggest for multiple instances of the same application?
MyApp = 'first.example.com'
MyApp = 'second.example.com'
I presume there would be no choice in this case but to use an fcgi
handler for each one and mod-perl can't be used
oh.. and for those of you not familar with git: here's a tarball.
http://files.perldition.org/Catalyst-View-Mason-0.09_01.tar.gz
-Flo
--
BOFH excuse #436:
Daemon escaped from pentagram
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
List:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:08:45PM -0700, mla wrote:
In terms of form validation, what do you guys think of this
interface? It uses perl to handle conditional logic/dependencies
instead of using a spec language like Data::FormValidator.
Might look at Rose::HTML::Objects and Form::Processor
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:04:42PM -0700, mla wrote:
Okay, thanks very much for this. So in terms of the model constraints,
you will validate everything twice. Once at the controller layer (where
it leverages info from the model), and once in the model itself.
So you can interrogate the
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:56:43PM -0700, mla wrote:
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:47:57AM -0700, mla wrote:
So with that design you'd get the centralized validation, which
is most critical to me, but then you could use SQL freely
and get back a collection of read-only active
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 09:48:44PM +0100, Ian Docherty wrote:
Matt S Trout wrote:
Or you could stuff 'em all in one fcgi handler with something like -
package DummyApp;
use Catalyst;
__PACKAGE__-setup;
my %rev_apps = (
MyApp = 'myapp.example.com',
MyOtherApp =
I didn't find a Catalyst plugin that would transparently deal with
persistent logins. Is there one? If not, what's the recommended way to
enable persistent logins in a Catalyst-driven website?
Thanks.
--
-
Evaldas Imbrasas
Matt S Trout wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:04:42PM -0700, mla wrote:
Okay, thanks very much for this. So in terms of the model constraints,
you will validate everything twice. Once at the controller layer (where
it leverages info from the model), and once in the model itself.
So you can
A. Pagaltzis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/15/2007 05:32:18 PM:
* Evaldas Imbrasas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-16 00:25]:
I didn't find a Catalyst plugin that would transparently deal
with persistent logins. Is there one? If not, what's the
recommended way to enable persistent logins
Evaldas Imbrasas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/15/2007 05:45:11 PM:
Persistent login is the one that lasts longer than a session. When a
user logs in, she gets an option to be remembered for a given period
of time. If this user comes back within that period of time, she is
auto-logged in.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Evaldas Imbrasas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05/15/2007 05:45:11 PM:
Persistent login is the one that lasts longer than a session. When a
user logs in, she gets an option to be remembered for a given period
of time. If this user comes back within that period of time,
I do not know what you mean lasts longer then a session -- http is
stateless, if you want state (such as logged in and authorized) you need
some sort of session (cookie, uri, hiddenform,...).
I am already using standard Catalyst plugins that handle sessions and
authentication. I set sessions
* Evaldas Imbrasas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-05-16 00:55]:
Persistent login is the one that lasts longer than a session.
When a user logs in, she gets an option to be remembered for a
given period of time. If this user comes back within that
period of time, she is auto-logged in. A good example
On Tuesday 15 May 2007 06:19:02 pm Evaldas Imbrasas wrote:
I do not know what you mean lasts longer then a session -- http is
stateless, if you want state (such as logged in and authorized) you need
some sort of session (cookie, uri, hiddenform,...).
I am already using standard Catalyst
I want to summarize some of the thoughts on this thread
and see if there's any strong disagreement.
o The model should validate its data.
o The controller should (directly or indirectly) validate
all the form input so you're pretty sure the model(s)
can handle it.
o Where the model and the
On 5/15/07, Jonathan Rockway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Use the session plugin and set the session expiration to ... 1 week. If some
data needs to expire sooner than that ... expire it sooner than that.
Here's what I would do. Create a session and log the user in. Store a last
login time in
On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 06:52:06PM +0200, Adam Sjøgren wrote:
Hi.
I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on what a good way to deploy
many (2-10, nothing extreme; different) Catalyst-based apps on a
single machine would be.
[...]
On a different track ... virtualization
At $work
On Tue, 15 May 2007, mla wrote:
o The controller should (directly or indirectly) validate
all the form input so you're pretty sure the model(s)
can handle it.
I'd just say ...
The controller should do whatever's needed to make sure data is passed
through a validation step (this may just
68 matches
Mail list logo
