Hi all,
Thank you for your inputs.
@ Dakshika :
Based on your input following modifications were made.
*Chart template structure*
└── line-chart
├── api.js
├── config.json
├── chart-libs
│ └── vendorName_version
│ └── js_css_images_etc_as_same_as_vendor_ships
├── css
│ └── line-chart.css
└── js
└── line-chart.js
*Generated gadget structure*
└── test_gadget
├── conf.json
├── gadget-controller.jag
├── gadget.json
├── index.png
├── index.xml
├── chart-libs
│ └── vendorName_version
│ └── js_css_images_etc_as_same_as_vendor_ships
├── css
│ └── line-chart.css
└── js
├── core-js
│ ├── gadget-core.js
│ ├── line-chart-api.js
│ └── provider-api.js
└── line-chart.js
*Folder structure for storing common libs*
portal
|── libs
├── vendorName_version
│ ├── <js/css/images and all files as the vendor ships>
*Changes to the existing model*
- common libs will reside inside portal/libs/
*chart config.json*
"common": {
"js": ["vendorName_version/common"],
"css": ["vendorName_version/common"]
},
"chart": {
"js": ["vendorName_version/d3.min", "vendorName_version/vega",
"line-chart"],
"css": ["vendorName_version/graph, line-chart"]
}
"common" is for libs fetched from /portal/libs
"chart" is for both chart specfic libs inside js folder of chart template
and chart-libs that are coming from vendors.
So with the change suggested by Dakshika we will have to specify the
directory path of chart-libs in the config.json (ex:
"vendorName_version/d3.min" )
But if it is a chart specific js file (in this example line-chart.js)
specifying the file name is enough.
In the gadget xml of the generated gadget we will be using the relative
path for libs fetched from /portal/libs.
@ Suho : Yes, the gadgets generated via old wizard will still work, I was
worried about the consistency between old gadgets and new gadgets generated
via the wizard. As per the offline chat we had, no obligations from IOT
side.
Thanks,
Tanya
--
Tanya Madurapperuma
Senior Software Engineer,
WSO2 Inc. : wso2.com
Mobile : +94718184439
Blog : http://tanyamadurapperuma.blogspot.com
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Dakshika Jayathilaka <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> IMO it's better if we can maintain third-party libraries as a separate
> entity. Usually, most of the third party libs have their own dependencies
> (ex: some CSS files refer images/ fonts ). If we place them separately it's
> hard to identify relevant dependency at a glance.
>
> At the same time, I would like to propose to have library version as
> well. This will really useful if someone wants to upgrade third-party lib
> etc.
>
> Regards,
>
> *Dakshika Jayathilaka*
> PMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos
> Senior Software Engineer
> WSO2, Inc.
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> 0771100911
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Tanya Madurapperuma <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> During an offline discussion with Jerad following modification were
>> suggested regarding the directory structure of the extension model. All
>> these changes are subjected to js and css file locations.
>>
>> *Chart template structure*
>>
>> |── line-chart
>> │ ├── css
>> │ │ └── line-chart.css
>> │ └── js
>> │ ├── d3.min.js
>> │ ├── vega.js
>> │ └── VizGrammar.min.js
>> |── config.json
>> ├── api.js
>>
>>
>> *Changes to the existing model*
>>
>> - rename index.js to api.js
>> - rename chart-libs folder to js
>> - have a css folder in the same level
>>
>>
>> *Generated gadget structure*
>>
>> └── test_gadget
>> │ │ ├── conf.json
>> │ │ ├── css
>> │ │ │ └── line-chart.css
>> │ │ ├── gadget-controller.jag
>> │ │ ├── gadget.json
>> │ │ ├── index.png
>> │ │ ├── index.xml
>> │ │ └── js
>> │ │ ├── core
>> │ │ │ ├── gadget-core.js
>> │ │ │ ├── line-chart-api.js
>> │ │ │ └── provider-api.js
>> │ │ ├── d3.min.js
>> │ │ ├── vega.js
>> │ │ └── VizGrammar.min.js
>>
>>
>> *Changes to the existing model*
>>
>> - Instead of the *chart-libs* folder inside *js* folder, have a *core
>> *folder inside *js *folder and place chart specific js files in js
>> folder
>>
>>
>> *Folder structure for storing common libs*
>>
>> portal
>> |── gadget-commons
>>
>> ├── css
>> │ └── common.css
>> └── js
>> └── common.js
>>
>>
>> *Changes to the existing model*
>>
>> - Now we have common libs inside portal/libs/common-chart-libs/
>>
>> *chart config.json*
>>
>> "common": {
>> "js": ["common"],
>> "css": ["common"]
>> },
>> "chart": {
>> "js": ["d3.min", "vega", "VizGrammar.min"],
>> "css": ["line-chart"]
>> }
>>
>> *existing config.json*
>>
>> "common-libs" : ["wso2gadgets","chart-utils"],
>> "chart-libs" : ["d3.min","vega","VizGrammar.min"]
>>
>> I think this model is cleaner and intuitive than the exiting model.
>> AFAIK existing wizard is only used for IOT analytics. If there are no
>> concerns from them shall we move to this new model?
>>
>> @ Suho, Dunith : WDYT ? Will this incur lot of changes from IOT side?
>> Appreciate your input.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tanya
>>
>> --
>> Tanya Madurapperuma
>>
>> Senior Software Engineer,
>> WSO2 Inc. : wso2.com
>> Mobile : +94718184439
>> Blog : http://tanyamadurapperuma.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
--
Tanya Madurapperuma
Senior Software Engineer,
WSO2 Inc. : wso2.com
Mobile : +94718184439
Blog : http://tanyamadurapperuma.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
