Hi manolo, Very happy to inform you that my first experiment code succeed at last. I have commit the code.
For test convenience, I have not been able to cope with the front code(WestActivity and WestView) in time. However, there have been some outputs in console that persuade me of its correctness. BTW, I have to reRun maven command "Hupa clean package" every time I update a server's RequestFactory code. Thanks for your detail reply. On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Manuel Carrasco Moñino <[email protected]>wrote: > Yep, although RF is well documented it is difficult to understand what are > the real goals on using it, basically what you have to understand about RF > is: > 1.- it facilitates to use server services (much better than rpc or > dispatcher) > 2.- proxy objects and entities is trivial. > 3.- a lot more of features, like serialize proxy objects in strings to > cache them in, chain operations and so just one request to the server, etc. > 4.- an cool thing is that with RF we are able to use it in JVM so testing > is very easy. Even we could use a pure java client to request a RF server > (it is used in android) > > Hupa data is not a good example for traditional entities: jpa, ddbb, etc > So in Hupa we have objects in the server side which we are able to persist > or read in some way. > > The user object actually is an object wich we persist in session, imap and > smtp needs this object to start new sessions over the server. When we had > oauth instead of a user object we would store just a authentication token > anywhere. > > The rest of objects are representations of a message, a folder, or > whatever. Which we persist or read using imap/smpt > > The worst thing in RF is the maven setup, and validation, when you debug > in eclipse you have to run the apt task and reload after changing any RF > service. > > I did take a look to your commits so I was informed that you were playing > with RF. Just send a daily email with your tasks although thew were > incomplete. > > - Manolo > > > On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 9:29 AM, echo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sorry, I am figuring out the RequestFactory of FetchFolders. >> I want to submit the report after one whole RequestFactory procedure(The >> fetch folder one) succeeding, that will be updated later today, I think. >> >> The reason why I have not submit the report these two days is that: >> I wanted to cope with the RequestFactory procedure of Login or >> CheckSession, but it was found that both of them are very close to the >> HttpSession and MailUser which are not good with RequestFactory. >> You may find that I have something commit to the Hupa Evo repository >> about the User RequestFactory yesterday, but the running Hupa was broken >> after clicking the Login submit. >> So I change my first RequestFactory experiment to the FetchFolder's one. >> And I think the code and report will be completed later today. >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Manuel Carrasco Moñino <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Hi echo, no status updates for a couple of days, let me know what is >>> happening. >>> >>> - Manolo >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *echo* >> > > -- *echo*
