Pluto 1.1 integration would be great, and would allow much more
reasonable dynamic additions of screens to the console. Someone just
needs to do the work. :)
I expect Jetspeed 2 would do the same, but I think Pluto would be much
more lightweight, so I would think it would be preferable for the
console, whereas Jetspeed and Liferay would be preferable for people
developing portal applications.
I believe David J did some initial work along these lines a while back.
Thanks,
Aaron
On 3/3/07, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 13, 2007, at 5:49 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> It's used by pluto for the admin console. No idea if more recent
> would work.
>
> We could upgrade pluto too if anyone has some time to investigate
I wonder if anyone from the Pluto team would want to help with
that... looks like 1.1 is not compatible with 1.0.1... but also looks
like that might not be a bad thing:
<snip>
Pluto 1.1 introduces a new container architecture. If you are
embedding Pluto in your portal, realize that 1.1 is not binarily
compatible with Pluto 1.0.x.
Pluto 1.1 aims to simplify the architecture in order to make it more
user and developer friendly. You should find Pluto 1.1 easier to get
started with, easier to understand, and easier to embed with your
portal. Your feedback regarding how far we've come is always welcome
on the user and developer mailing lists!
</snip>
I don't know much abort portal muck, so I can't really show how much
better 1.1 might be... but I know that there have been some issues
with the console asis now to get stuff like plugin porlets installed
dynamically... perhaps 1.1 can help solve some of these issues?
Anyone know?
--jason
