On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Stanton Sievers <[email protected]>wrote:
> Responses inline > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Stanton, my thoughts are inline... > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Stanton Sievers <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the link. > > > > > > Based on that information and what I've found in PagesResource, I think > > > cloning via a GET then POST could work with a few caveats. > > > > > > 1) POST /pages doesn't currently allow you to create a page for a user > > > other than the current user which is currently a use case for cloning. > I > > > think this could be a simple addition to the current API by providing a > > > userId param as we do with the templateId. > > > > > > > Flow question: why do you need to be able to clone a page to another > user? > > Isn't the use case to have a user clone either their own page or a page > > that is shared with them? I'm sure I'm not considering a use case but I > > can't think of it. > > > > Unless I'm mistaken you can clone a page to another user in the "Share > Page" dialog in the default portal today. Is this not a desired use case > or is it being deprecated? Am I misunderstanding the "New" link of the > "Share Page" dialog? > Oh, that's not at all how I understood "Share Page" to work. In my mind, cloning and sharing are two very different things. Clone to me mean, make a completely separate copy. Share mean, share the page so that when the owner makes a change, the person it was shared with see that change. Now, I'm not sure how it's actually implemented but above is how I thought it should work. > > > > > > > > > 2) The PageService APIs currently being used to handle page creation > > don't > > > handle subpages very well at all. I went through that exercise when > > fixing > > > page cloning in DefaultPageService. The same changes would either need > > to > > > happen for page creation server-side or the onus will be with the > > > client-side to call POST /pages/{id}/subpages to make sure the subpages > > get > > > populated properly. > > > > > > > The honest truth is that the REST API needs some serious thought/design. > We > > started off well but it kind of stalled for a few reasons. I want to make > > sure the REST API is built for the future, not to match the backend. > > > > I agree. I'm not in a great position yet to understand the future > direction for the REST API, but I'll be happy to participate in those > discussions to ensure that any work I do in this area matches the > direction. > > > > > > > > > > 3) There are likely caveats with region widgets as there are with > > > subpages. If a region widget has been adding/moved/removed in a page > or > > > subpage, I'm not sure that would be reflected in the newly created page > > > because it gets created from the given template layout. > > > > > > At the end of the day, I think the shortest path is to re-introduce the > > > clone API and use the existing API in PageService to service the > request. > > > > > > What do others think? > > > > > > > How would you suggest that looks like (.../page/<id>/clone as a POST???). > > > > Perhaps. I hadn't thought through what the API call would actually look > like, but that seems reasonable if that's the direction we want to go in. > I'm not a fan of that approach actually because I lean more towards the "purist" REST view than many. I'm not a fan of having actions as part of the URL structure whenever possible. I need to think about how we might structure this so we can achieve a clone effect while still keeping the url structure. Maybe it's not possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Matt Franklin < > > [email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Stanton Sievers < > [email protected] > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > I've been working a lot with the page cloning functionality in Rave > > > > > recently (you might have noticed). I've discovered a need to move > > the > > > > > clone API to CXF so that the Page object returned from the clone > page > > > API > > > > > matches the page object structure expected by API calls like > > updatePage > > > > > which is currently implemented via CXF. > > > > > > > > > > I've done some investigating and I have some questions I'm hoping > > this > > > > list > > > > > could help answer. I've noticed that > > > org.apache.rave.rest.PagesResource > > > > > doesn't have a clone API currently. It used to have one but was > > > removed > > > > > with commit 1505802 with a comment of " update to Resource > interfaces > > > to > > > > > support proposed api specification". I'm wondering why the clone > API > > > was > > > > > removed from PagesResource. Did it move somewhere else? Can > anyone > > > > > elaborate on the mentioned "api specification". > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/rave/RESTAPI > > > > > > > > There were also a bunch of e-mail threads around the proper way to > > > approach > > > > this. If I remember right, there were some proponents for making > > clone a > > > > combination of a GET and a POST of the page to the API. I think > there > > > are > > > > some nuances in cloning that this might not cover though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I noticed that RAVE-924 [1] has been resolved and I don't see any > > other > > > > > page related tasks in its parent, RAVE-910 [2]. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-924 > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-910 > > > > > > > > > > > > We can add a new ticket to the parent if client side copying does not > > > > accomplish what we need to do. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > -Stanton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
