Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-24 Thread Jeremy Quinn


On 23 Aug 2008, at 15:12, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:


Jeremy Quinn pisze:

Should I upgrade to 1.5 before accessing the new Branch?


Yes, please. This new merge support requires both client and server  
of 1.5 version.


I am glad I asked (!)



Fine by me, enjoy September, I hope the weather is better than  
August has been !!


I'm going to Greece to sail a little bit; the weather simply must be  
good there. :-)


Lucky you!
Have a brilliant time :)

regards Jeremy


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-23 Thread Alfred Nathaniel
On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 19:46 -0400, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
 On Aug 21, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Jeremy Quinn wrote:
 
  But in the short term, what do people prefer?
 
  My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar  
  (a single file in SVN)?
 
 Personally, jar file is just fine. Most or all IDEs can peek inside  
 jar file and show any file you want to see. And it is faster to pull  
 then 4k files (is this number for Dojo files only or Dojo and all  
 files added by the Subversion?)

+1 for the jar

That avoids also the temptation to modify the Dojo sources in our SVN.

Cheers, Alfred.



Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-23 Thread Grzegorz Kossakowski

Jeremy Quinn pisze:

Should I upgrade to 1.5 before accessing the new Branch?


Yes, please. This new merge support requires both client and server of 1.5 
version.



Fine by me, enjoy September, I hope the weather is better than August 
has been !!


I'm going to Greece to sail a little bit; the weather simply must be good 
there. :-)


Now, looking forward to your commits!


Many thanks for enabling this.

Even though I have been scrupulously backing up, I'll feel a lot safer 
when this enormous amount of work is in SVN!


You welcome.

--
Best regards,
Grzegorz Kossakowski


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-22 Thread Jeremy Quinn

Thanks Vadim,

Point taken :)

regards Jeremy

On 22 Aug 2008, at 00:46, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:


On Aug 21, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Jeremy Quinn wrote:


But in the short term, what do people prefer?

My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar  
(a single file in SVN)?


Personally, jar file is just fine. Most or all IDEs can peek inside  
jar file and show any file you want to see. And it is faster to pull  
then 4k files (is this number for Dojo files only or Dojo and all  
files added by the Subversion?)


Vadim




Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Robin Wyles

Hi,

Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere? I  
can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs  
when using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if dojo  
1.1 resolves these.


Chris... is your forms XSL available anywhere too?

Many thanks,

Robin

On 16 Jun 2008, at 08:00, Gabriel Gruber wrote:



Hi Chris!

Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is  
doing that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great,  
if you could join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated  
into the next cocoon release :-)


greets,
Gabriel
__
Gabriel Gruber
Senior Consultant
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien



Christofer Dutz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12.06.2008 09:54
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
Subject
CForms and Dojo





Hi there,

I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of  
dojo used for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since  
my current application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff  
and I was sort of annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and  
1.1 together, I started creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which  
does the same as the original cocoon version, instead it uses dojo  
1.1 with all its advanced features. It is currently working nicely.


Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If  
yes, it might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it  
to the cocoon guys (It looks a lot nicer).


While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of  
the validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff … it would be  
great if this information was forwarded here, cause I could  
additionally use the Dojo client-side validation in addition to the  
server-side validation of CForms (I know this doesn’t work for all  
validators) reducing some client-server-roundtrips.


Chris



[ C h r i s t o f e r  D u t z ]

C-Ware IT-Service
Inhaber
Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt

fon:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
fax:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
mobil:  0171 / 7 444 2 33
email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.c-ware.de
FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581








smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Grzegorz Kossakowski

Robin Wyles pisze:

Hi,

Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere? I 
can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs when 
using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if dojo 1.1 
resolves these.


Hi Robin,

From my experience it looks like there are many people asking about Dojo 1.1 integration, few that 
seem to work on this stuff for their own but almost nobody that is willing to work on trunk.


Actually, Jeremy Quinn has probably the best progress but he still keeps everything on his local 
computer to our misfortune.


Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you should branch whole 2.1 and 
commit your work to your branch.


Also, even if I could assist with this process (which is very easy btw.) but I think it should be 
you who establishes the branch because I have no free cycles to support branch of 2.1 at the moment. 
Fortunately enough, at Apache we have Subversion 1.5 installed so you will be able to take advantage 
of improved branch/merge support in 1.5.



Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes his work we can all join our forces 
to push things forward. When it comes to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to trunk.


--
Grzegorz Kossakowski


AW: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Christofer Dutz
Well I can send you my Xslt, but it’s really pre-sub-alpha-0.0.0.0.1 Version
;-)

 

But I am using dojo widgets in repeaters though and they work as they
should. I can send you the file, but I’d suggest using it as inspiration and
not for production ;-)

 

Currently I am working myself into the mysteries of Cocoon 2.2 and it’s
build voodoo, so I haven’t had the time to make some real progress here. But
I am optimistic, that I will get the hang of C2.2 pretty soon. Jeremy is
currently working on client side validation and Dojo 1.1 … unfortunately I
haven’t had the time to make the changes needed for this. I promise I will
do my best to do this next week.

 

Chris

 

 

Von: Robin Wyles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 11:08
An: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Betreff: Re: CForms and Dojo

 

Hi,

 

Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere? I can't
seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs when using
certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if dojo 1.1 resolves
these.

 

Chris... is your forms XSL available anywhere too?

 

Many thanks,

 

Robin

 

On 16 Jun 2008, at 08:00, Gabriel Gruber wrote:






Hi Chris! 

Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is doing
that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great, if you could
join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated into the next cocoon
release :-) 

greets, 
Gabriel 
__
Gabriel Gruber
Senior Consultant
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien





Christofer Dutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

12.06.2008 09:54 


Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


To

[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


cc



Subject

CForms and Dojo

 






Hi there, 
  
I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of dojo used
for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since my current
application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff and I was sort of
annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and 1.1 together, I started
creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which does the same as the original
cocoon version, instead it uses dojo 1.1 with all its advanced features. It
is currently working nicely. 
  
Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If yes, it
might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it to the cocoon
guys (It looks a lot nicer). 
  
While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of the
validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff … it would be great if this
information was forwarded here, cause I could additionally use the Dojo
client-side validation in addition to the server-side validation of CForms
(I know this doesn’t work for all validators) reducing some
client-server-roundtrips. 
  
Chris 
  
  
  
[ C h r i s t o f e r  D u t z ]

C-Ware IT-Service
Inhaber
Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt

fon:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
fax:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
mobil:  0171 / 7 444 2 33
email:   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.c-ware.de/ http://www.c-ware.de 
FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581 
  
  
  
  

 



Re: AW: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Robin Wyles
Many thanks for all your replies... seems there is some enthusiasm  
for this after all! Once Jeremy's work is accessible somewhere I'd be  
happy to help with any further work that needs to be done.


Chris: I would love to see your xslt, just so I can see if my widget  
in a repeater woes are solved by dojo 1.1.


Robin

On 21 Aug 2008, at 11:32, Christofer Dutz wrote:

Well I can send you my Xslt, but it’s really pre-sub- 
alpha-0.0.0.0.1 Version ;-)


But I am using dojo widgets in repeaters though and they work as  
they should. I can send you the file, but I’d suggest using it as  
inspiration and not for production ;-)


Currently I am working myself into the mysteries of Cocoon 2.2 and  
it’s build voodoo, so I haven’t had the time to make some real  
progress here. But I am optimistic, that I will get the hang of  
C2.2 pretty soon. Jeremy is currently working on client side  
validation and Dojo 1.1 … unfortunately I haven’t had the time to  
make the changes needed for this. I promise I will do my best to do  
this next week.


Chris


Von: Robin Wyles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 11:08
An: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Betreff: Re: CForms and Dojo

Hi,

Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere?  
I can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs  
when using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if  
dojo 1.1 resolves these.


Chris... is your forms XSL available anywhere too?

Many thanks,

Robin

On 16 Jun 2008, at 08:00, Gabriel Gruber wrote:



Hi Chris!

Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is  
doing that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great,  
if you could join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated  
into the next cocoon release :-)


greets,
Gabriel
__
Gabriel Gruber
Senior Consultant
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien


Christofer Dutz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12.06.2008 09:54

Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
Subject
CForms and Dojo




Hi there,

I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of  
dojo used for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since  
my current application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff  
and I was sort of annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and  
1.1 together, I started creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which  
does the same as the original cocoon version, instead it uses dojo  
1.1 with all its advanced features. It is currently working nicely.


Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If  
yes, it might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it  
to the cocoon guys (It looks a lot nicer).


While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of  
the validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff … it would be  
great if this information was forwarded here, cause I could  
additionally use the Dojo client-side validation in addition to the  
server-side validation of CForms (I know this doesn’t work for all  
validators) reducing some client-server-roundtrips.


Chris



[ C h r i s t o f e r  D u t z ]

C-Ware IT-Service
Inhaber
Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt

fon:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
fax:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
mobil:  0171 / 7 444 2 33
email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.c-ware.de
FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581









smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Jeremy Quinn

Hi Guys

Thanks for the interest

On 21 Aug 2008, at 10:47, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:


Robin Wyles pisze:

Hi,
Can anyone tell me if this work in progress is available anywhere?  
I can't seem to find it in trunk.. I am coming up against some bugs  
when using certain dojo within a repeater - would love to see if  
dojo 1.1 resolves these.


Hi Robin,

From my experience it looks like there are many people asking about  
Dojo 1.1 integration, few that seem to work on this stuff for their  
own but almost nobody that is willing to work on trunk.


The problem with working in trunk (as I saw it) was the sheer amount  
of time in which cforms would have been unreleasable. Moving from 0.4  
to 1.1.1 just broke absolutely everything.


Actually, Jeremy Quinn has probably the best progress but he still  
keeps everything on his local computer to our misfortune.


Sorry, it just seemed easier :(

Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you  
should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.


With your help, I'd be happy to do this.

Also, even if I could assist with this process (which is very easy  
btw.) but I think it should be you who establishes the branch  
because I have no free cycles to support branch of 2.1 at the  
moment. Fortunately enough, at Apache we have Subversion 1.5  
installed so you will be able to take advantage of improved branch/ 
merge support in 1.5.


Lets do it !!
I am getting really close to having all widgets re-written to Dojo  
1.1.1 APIs, still not quite there yet.


But as it looks like I have some work coming up that will delay me  
further, this could be a good time to get it out.


Apart from my dwindling list or re-writes, there will obviously be a  
big list of niggles and bugs to fix, specially as none of this is  
tested on MSIE.


Cleaning up samples
Devising a good scheme for packaging code and i18n
Waiting for a slew of bug fixes that will come in Dojo 1.2
Implementing client-side validation based on cforms validators, not  
just datatypes (as I have now)


etc. etc.

There is still a lot to do, but once these last few widgets are  
written and all legacy samples work again, people will be able to run  
and use it, criticise, tweak, fix, meaning the slope should be  
downhill :)


Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes his  
work we can all join our forces to push things forward. When it  
comes to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to trunk.


That would be great!!

best regards

Jeremy






Re: AW: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Jeremy Quinn


On 21 Aug 2008, at 11:42, Robin Wyles wrote:

Many thanks for all your replies... seems there is some enthusiasm  
for this after all! Once Jeremy's work is accessible somewhere I'd  
be happy to help with any further work that needs to be done.


Chris: I would love to see your xslt, just so I can see if my widget  
in a repeater woes are solved by dojo 1.1.


The Repeater Widget in the new CForms has been completely re-written.
Widgets in Repeaters work well (of course :)

As a taster, here is some of the new functionality :

Repeaters gracefully upgrade from their simplest 'static' form  
(controlled via action buttons) up to full-blown drag and drop solely  
via configuration in the Model and Template. Lazy-loading of code  
ensures that only the Libs required for what you need are loaded.


Some of the features of DnD :
  Easy to control behaviour, enforced by the Model
  Select row(s) optionally without a visible select control
  Optional Select/Drag handles
  DnD single or multiple rows at a time
  Avatars of rows being dragged plus lots of visual feedback
  No longer any need for custom handlers in your form for DnD
  Control over allowing/enforcing copy or move within a Repeater or  
between Repeaters
  Control over what is allowed to be dragged from one Repeater to  
another

  Control copy/move, multi-select/deselect using typical meta-keys
  Extensive visual customisation via CSS

etc. etc.

NB. You should only need to edit the templates of existing projects'  
Repeaters if :
a) you were using the old DnD Widgets (where you specified the Dojo  
Widget in your Template, nasty)

b) you want to use the new behaviour

I hope you will find the new Repeater to be a really powerful addition  
to your webapps and I hope it was worth the wait ;)


regards

Jeremy



Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Grzegorz Kossakowski

Hi Jeremy,

Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you 
should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.


With your help, I'd be happy to do this.


I've created a branch called BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1 based on latest version of 2.1 branch. It's your 
sandbox now and you can safely play around there without any risk of buildings someone's work or 
block any releases.


The URL for branch is:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/



Lets do it !!
I am getting really close to having all widgets re-written to Dojo 1.1.1 
APIs, still not quite there yet.


But as it looks like I have some work coming up that will delay me 
further, this could be a good time to get it out.


Actually, now it's very easy, just switch your checkout of Cocoon's source code to the branch and 
commit your stuff there.


Don't know which client for svn you are using, but from cmd line it would be:
svn switch 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/

(https is important here, of course)

I only have one ask to you:
Could you try to commit as small changesets as possible (of course, not to small)? The best 
situation would be if one commit reflects one logical change (like migration of one widget to new 
API or something like that). Rule would be that one commit is big enough to not introduce 
intermediate states where state of branch is completely broken. So half-baked commits are bad idea.


On the other hand, single commit should not contain anything more than is necessary to fulfill 
requirement outlined above.


I ask you to split your work into smaller chunks because then it's easier to merge things in the 
future and it's much easier to follow your work and port it to trunk. However, I'm aware that when 
one is doing heavy refactorings following this rules is not always possible.


Last thing: descriptive commit messages. Even if that may sound obvious, but they are really, really 
needed. ;-)

This is especially a case when someone else must keep trunk in sync with your 
work.

Apart from my dwindling list or re-writes, there will obviously be a big 
list of niggles and bugs to fix, specially as none of this is tested on 
MSIE.


Here I hope that we can count on help of our community.


Cleaning up samples
Devising a good scheme for packaging code and i18n
Waiting for a slew of bug fixes that will come in Dojo 1.2
Implementing client-side validation based on cforms validators, not just 
datatypes (as I have now)


Is the last item absolutely necessary for initial release?


etc. etc.

There is still a lot to do, but once these last few widgets are written 
and all legacy samples work again, people will be able to run and use 
it, criticise, tweak, fix, meaning the slope should be downhill :)


:)

Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes his 
work we can all join our forces to push things forward. When it comes 
to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to trunk.


That would be great!!


Even there is one caveat: for me September is going to be more or less free month and I plan to not 
touch computer too much so I could start with porting stuff to trunk in October.


Now, looking forward to your commits!

--
Best regards,
Grzegorz Kossakowski


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Jeremy Quinn

Hi Grzegorz

On 21 Aug 2008, at 13:36, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:


Hi Jeremy,

Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you  
should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.

With your help, I'd be happy to do this.


I've created a branch called BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1 based on latest  
version of 2.1 branch. It's your sandbox now and you can safely play  
around there without any risk of buildings someone's work or block  
any releases.


The URL for branch is:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/


Brilliant!!
Many thanks for this.

So, I am running client SVN version 1.4.4 (r25188).
Should I upgrade to 1.5 before accessing the new Branch?


Lets do it !!
I am getting really close to having all widgets re-written to Dojo  
1.1.1 APIs, still not quite there yet.
But as it looks like I have some work coming up that will delay me  
further, this could be a good time to get it out.


Actually, now it's very easy, just switch your checkout of Cocoon's  
source code to the branch and commit your stuff there.


Don't know which client for svn you are using, but from cmd line it  
would be:

svn switch 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1/

(https is important here, of course)


Yes, thanks for the advice.


I only have one ask to you:
Could you try to commit as small changesets as possible (of course,  
not to small)? The best situation would be if one commit reflects  
one logical change (like migration of one widget to new API or  
something like that). Rule would be that one commit is big enough to  
not introduce intermediate states where state of branch is  
completely broken. So half-baked commits are bad idea.


On the other hand, single commit should not contain anything more  
than is necessary to fulfill requirement outlined above.


I ask you to split your work into smaller chunks because then it's  
easier to merge things in the future and it's much easier to follow  
your work and port it to trunk. However, I'm aware that when one is  
doing heavy refactorings following this rules is not always possible.


I'll do my best.

I'll start to perform the commit, very carefully, over the next couple  
of days, and report back when I think it is ready for trying out.


Last thing: descriptive commit messages. Even if that may sound  
obvious, but they are really, really needed. ;-)
This is especially a case when someone else must keep trunk in sync  
with your work.


Of course

Apart from my dwindling list or re-writes, there will obviously be  
a big list of niggles and bugs to fix, specially as none of this is  
tested on MSIE.


Here I hope that we can count on help of our community.


Me too :)


Cleaning up samples
Devising a good scheme for packaging code and i18n
Waiting for a slew of bug fixes that will come in Dojo 1.2
Implementing client-side validation based on cforms validators, not  
just datatypes (as I have now)


Is the last item absolutely necessary for initial release?


No it is not.

And of course, a major item I left off the list, is updating the  
documentation 



etc. etc.
There is still a lot to do, but once these last few widgets are  
written and all legacy samples work again, people will be able to  
run and use it, criticise, tweak, fix, meaning the slope should be  
downhill :)


:)

Robin, back to your question: I hope that once Jeremy publishes  
his work we can all join our forces to push things forward. When  
it comes to me, I can help with porting Jeremy's work from 2.1 to  
trunk.

That would be great!!


Even there is one caveat: for me September is going to be more or  
less free month and I plan to not touch computer too much so I could  
start with porting stuff to trunk in October.


Fine by me, enjoy September, I hope the weather is better than August  
has been !!



Now, looking forward to your commits!


Many thanks for enabling this.

Even though I have been scrupulously backing up, I'll feel a lot safer  
when this enormous amount of work is in SVN!


best regards

Jeremy





Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Jeremy Quinn

Hi All

On 21 Aug 2008, at 13:36, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:

Jeremy, I was thinking about this branch yesterday and I think you  
should branch whole 2.1 and commit your work to your branch.

With your help, I'd be happy to do this.


I've created a branch called BRANCH_2_1_X-dojo1_1 based on latest  
version of 2.1 branch. It's your sandbox now and you can safely play  
around there without any risk of buildings someone's work or block  
any releases.


I have a question regarding how Dojo itself should be packaged.

In 2.1.11 (and maybe 2.2) Dojo is compiled into a Jar and served via  
resource://.

There is an Ant script in the Ajax block for building this.

While I have been working on 2.1.12-dev, I just made Dojo a 2.1-style  
block (src/blocks/dojotoolkit), for convenience.


I have scrupulously avoided patching the Dojo Release at all, but  
during development is was useful to have easy access to the source and  
sometimes add debug statements etc.


What I did have to do was to rebuild Dojo's CLDR resources (equivalent  
to i18n messages) to get the widest L10N support for number formatting  
etc. (approx 187 variants).


This fully-expanded dev-Dojo block (4126 files!!) is very convenient  
for anyone developing /CForms/ but maybe less convenient for people  
developing /with/ CForms and definitely no good for going into  
production.


I am confidant that between us, we can come up with a sound solution  
for making a minified, packaged Dojo, Ajax and CForms release  
optimised for production . but we still need a more complete  
version for viewing the samples etc.


But in the short term, what do people prefer?

My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar (a  
single file in SVN)?


Thanks for any suggestions

regards Jeremy


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-08-21 Thread Vadim Gritsenko

On Aug 21, 2008, at 10:59 AM, Jeremy Quinn wrote:


But in the short term, what do people prefer?

My fully expanded Dojo as a block (every file in SVN), or as a Jar  
(a single file in SVN)?


Personally, jar file is just fine. Most or all IDEs can peek inside  
jar file and show any file you want to see. And it is faster to pull  
then 4k files (is this number for Dojo files only or Dojo and all  
files added by the Subversion?)


Vadim


Re: CForms and Dojo

2008-06-16 Thread Gabriel Gruber
Hi Chris!

Jeremy is actually integrating Dojo 1.1 into cforms. I think he is doing 
that in the 2.1.12dev branch and in trunk. It would be great, if you could 
join forces with jeremy to have dojo 1.1 integrated into the next cocoon 
release :-)

greets,
Gabriel
__
Gabriel Gruber
Senior Consultant
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Workflow EDV GmbH, Dannebergplatz 6/23, A-1030 Wien




Christofer Dutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
12.06.2008 09:54
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc

Subject
CForms and Dojo






Hi there,
 
I am still using Cocoon 2.1.9 and was wandering if the version of dojo 
used for CForms in Ajax-Mode is used in 2.1.10 and 2.2? Since my current 
application is currently using a lot of Dojo 1.1 Stuff and I was sort of 
annoyed of the problem having to use dojo 0.4 and 1.1 together, I started 
creating my own forms-styling.xsl, which does the same as the original 
cocoon version, instead it uses dojo 1.1 with all its advanced features. 
It is currently working nicely. 
 
Does Cocoon in a version greater than 2.1.9 still use Dojo 0.4? If yes, it 
might be interesting for me to clean up my xslt and give it to the cocoon 
guys (It looks a lot nicer).
 
While working on the Dojo 1.1 integration I found out that none of the 
validation-information is passed to the fi-stuff … it would be great if 
this information was forwarded here, cause I could additionally use the 
Dojo client-side validation in addition to the server-side validation of 
CForms (I know this doesn’t work for all validators) reducing some 
client-server-roundtrips.
 
Chris
 
 
 
[ C h r i s t o f e r  D u t z ]

C-Ware IT-Service
Inhaber
Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz
Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt

fon:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 61
fax:  0 61 51 / 27315 - 64
mobil:  0171 / 7 444 2 33
email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.c-ware.de
FA Darmstadt: 07 813 60581