[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12604810#action_12604810
]
Felix Meschberger commented on FELIX-584:
-----------------------------------------
> The problem with this approach is the fact that in many cases the
> Configuration instance
> will not be persisted or available until the update() method is used to set
> new properties
This is not quite correct: A new configuration object is immediately persisted
but _not_ delivered. Only when the update method is first called on the
Configuration will the configuration be delivered.
Hence the operation of first creating and in a second request updating the
configuration is not completely wrong.
Anyway, the current implementation of the GUI is problematic as it tries (and
fails) to mix a selection mix for configuration objects and factories. A better
approach, which you are also using, is to have two selection lists: One for
concrete configurations (existing and non-existing for ManagedService
instances) and one for factory configurations.
Now, the implementation would -- upon creation of a factory configuration --
show that factory configuration with default values filled in. The user may
then update (aka save) the configuration and it will be delivered.
> org.apache.felix.webconsole.internal.compendium.AjaxConfigManagerAction.applyConfiguration():
> "create" action is not handled properly
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FELIX-584
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-584
> Project: Felix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Web Console
> Reporter: Dieter Wimberger
> Assignee: Felix Meschberger
> Attachments: AjaxConfigManagerAction.java.diff
>
>
> The current revision of the code (662145) creates the configuration, and
> returns true.
> else if ( request.getParameter( "create" ) != null )
> {
> // pid is a factory PID and we have to create a new configuration
> // we should actually also display that one !
> Configuration config = ca.createFactoryConfiguration( pid, null );
> // request.setAttribute(ATTR_REDIRECT_PARAMETERS, "pid=" +
> // config.getPid());
> return true;
> }
> The problem with this approach is the fact that in many cases the
> Configuration instance will not be persisted or available until the update()
> method is used to set new properties.
> Based on the fact that the "create" action may be called already with a
> complete set of properties edited in the form, I would suggest to only
> differentiate between factory "create" and "save" in the way the
> Configuration instance is created. i.e.:
> if ( request.getParameter( "create" ) != null )
> {
> // pid is a factory PID and we have to create a new configuration
> config = ca.createFactoryConfiguration( pid, null );
> } else {
> // pid is managed service, get configuration
> config = ca.getConfiguration( pid, null );
> }
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
