Henry I didn't revert them yet I just reverted them in my local 
environment.  I will let you do that if you want :)

-Ryan




From:   Henry Saputra <[email protected]>
To:     daviesd <[email protected]>, 
Cc:     "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date:   06/01/2012 03:29 PM
Subject:        Re: requestNavigateTo and beta1 v.s. trunk differences



Doug,

Super mea culpa from me. I remember testing this in my env and was ok :(
We need to add unit test for it.

I will take a look at this tonight when I have access to my dev machine,
but thanks to Ryan for reverting the changes for now.

Henry


On Friday, June 1, 2012, daviesd <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> Thank You Thank You Thank You.  I will try what you suggest with the
> buffering, but I'm not sure I want that as a long term solution.
>
> doug
>
>
> On 6/1/12 2:55 PM, "Ryan J Baxter" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> This is certainly a bug, I can reproduce it in the common container as
>> well.  After stepping through the code I think I figured out what is
>> happening, basically when you switch views after the initial load in 
the
>> GadgetSite code both the currentGadgetHolder and the 
loadingGadgetHolder
>> are set to a GadgetHolder pointing to the same DOM element.  When we 
call
>> GadgetSite.onRender when switching views we first call
>> currentGadgetHolder.dispose which removes the element from the DOM and
>> then we finally set currentGadgetHolder to loadingGadgetHolder. Problem
>> is since the currentGadgetHolder and the loadingGadgetHolder point to 
the
>> same DOM element we end up removing the iframe which contained the new
>> view.
>>
>> I THINK if you supply a separate buffering element when you create your
>> site you would not run into this problem, you can certainly give that a
>> shot and see if that works.  If there is no buffering element the site
>> will use the element in which the gadget is currently rendered in when
>> creating the loadingGadgetHolder, which leads to the problem we are
>> seeing.
>>
>> I reverted the changes Henry made in this review,
>> https://reviews.apache.org/r/4486/ and the problem goes away.  Henry 
can
>> you take a look at this?  I am pretty sure it is the changes in
>> SiteHolder.dispose that are causing the problem here.  While I think
using
>> a buffering element would solve the problem, the API (at this point)
>> indicates the buffering element is optional, so everything should work
>> without it.
>>
>> -Ryan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:   daviesd <[email protected]>
>> To:     <[email protected]>,
>> Date:   06/01/2012 11:30 AM
>> Subject:        Re: requestNavigateTo and beta1 v.s. trunk differences
>>
>>
>>
>> Ya, that was my first thought.  But inspecting with firebug reveals 
that
>> there is not even any content from the view navigated to.  Even if I
>> change
>> the code to
>>
>> container.navigateGadget( site, url, [], {} );
>>
>> It doesn't re-navigate to the default view again (even though that how 
I
>> rendered the gadget in the first place).
>>
>> I'll double check on the adjustHeight stuff, but I don't think that is
it.
>>
>> Thanks Ryan (btw... I watched some of your youtube opensocial sandbox
>> videos
>> yesterday... very nice).
>>
>> doug
>>
>>
>> On 6/1/12 11:18 AM, "Ryan J Baxter" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Doug, does the gadget call adjustHeight?  There were changes that went
>>> into Shindig [1] [2] that changed some of the CSS inside the gadgets
>>> iframe to allow the inter content to scroll.  We noticed in some of 
our
>>> containers that we had to alter the CSS on our gadget sites to make
>> things
>>> work properly.  Is there content actually in the site?  Maybe the
>>> adjustHeight call is not working / the CSS for the site element needs 
to
>>> change.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1766
>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1767
>>>
>>> -Ryan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From:   daviesd <[email protected]>
>>> To:     shindig <[email protected]>,
>>> Date:   06/01/2012 10:58 AM
>>> Subject:        Re: requestNavigateTo and beta1 v.s. trunk differences
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Doh! It¹s Friday.  I guess I should have described the symptoms.  I 
end
>> up
>>> with a gadget with no content area (collapsed).
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/1/12 10:50 AM, "daviesd" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anyone (Dan?) have any idea why this code
>>>>
>>>>     container.rpcRegister("requestNavigateTo", function
>>>> requestNavigateTo(rpcArgs, view, params) {
>>>>
>>>>         var site = rpcArgs[osapi.container.GadgetSite.RPC_ARG_KEY],
>>>>             url = site.getActiveSiteHolder().getUrl(),
>>>>             renderParams = {};
>>>>
>>>>         renderParams[osapi.container.RenderParam.VIEW] = view;
>>>>         container.navigateGadget( site, url, params, renderParams );
>>>>     });
>>>>
>>>> doesn¹t work with the latest 2.5 snapshot?  We¹ve been using beta1
>> since
>>> it
>>>> was created, but will all the activity for beta2 I thought I ought to
>>> get a
>>>> jump start and see what broke for us.  This worked in beta1.  I¹ve
>>> logged the
>>>> site, url, and view and they all seem legit.
>>>>
>>>> doug
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Reply via email to