Sounds good. Ill submit the patch shortly

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Erin Noe-Payne
<[email protected]>wrote:

> Agreed with Dan.
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Dan Gornstein <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Rohit Kalkur <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hey everyone,
> >>
> >> I am writing a check for the ng-hide directive of the "Add widgets to
> this
> >> page" message (which is displayed on any Page that does not have any
> >> widgets on it).
> >>
> >> For now, I have added a method to the PageResource object called
> >> hasRegionWidgets(), which basically determines whether any of the
> regions
> >> for that page have region widgets.
> >>
> >> However, I was examining the tabs.html and thought eventually it might
> make
> >> sense to refactor the CurrentPageCtrl into 2 separate controllers: one
> for
> >> handling the current page tab functionality (edit page, move page,
> delete
> >> page, etc...) and one for managing operations on the current page itself
> >> (sending the current page info to the widget store).
> >>
> >
> > +1 I think this makes sense. We don't want the controllers to get too big
> > and handle too much so that they can be reused by people for specific
> > purposes. These seem like two different parts of functionality and I
> > believe make sense to be split up.
> >
> >>
> >> If we go with that design, it might make sense to move the
> >> 'hasRegionWidgets check' to the controller that would manage the current
> >> page operations.
> >>
> >
> > +1
> >
> >>
> >> Anyhow, I just wanted to poll the dev list to see what everyone's
> thoughts
> >> were. For now, I was thinking of just submitting the patch with the
> >> hasRegionWidgets() method on the PageResource and then later on down the
> >> road if we go with the 2 split controllers, we can just refactor
> >> everything.
> >>
> >
> > I think submitting the patch for now is fine as we are in active
> > development and it is easy to change once some more people weigh in on
> the
> > options or conform to lazy consensus.
> >
> >>
> >> Let me know what you think.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >> -Rohit K
> >>
>

Reply via email to