Thanks for the great description, I'm going to go document this in the code.
As uP3 development progresses looking at the DLM sandbox code will be revisited and at that point we can look at really trying to remove that method. Thanks, -Eric Mark Boyd wrote: > Hi Eric. Good to hear from you. Sorry for the late reply. I haven't > been reading this inbox faithfully. > > This goes back to Peter's move to rip DOM dependence out of layout > managers several years ago that resulted in the IUserLayout. But this > also has ramifications on cacheability. The code base in the sandbox > that I checked in before I knew that I was leaving sungard contains > some layout caching improvements and that work done by my colleague > showed how that method really does inhibit such caching improvements. > It allows direct manipulating of the DOM that can't be accounted for > by the caching without some prompt that the DOM changed and needs to > be updated. However, I seem to recall that will later DOM revisions > there was supposed to be some kind of listener capability coming out > that could be leveraged to ensure such cache purging. > > But again, sungard hasn't come through on rolling all of their changes > into trunk beyond putting them in sandbox and I don't see any emails > from anyone over there anymore on the list. Nor do I see Peter on the > list very often anymore. So if the current movers and shaker on the > list are comfortable with DOM dependence then remove the deprecated > stuff and potentially even remove the IUserLayout dependence for > consistency. It is a pain to support both. Seeing the support that DOM > continues to receive and the improvements over time I am comfortable > with it. Of course, I'm not using uPortal anymore or at least not in > my current place of employment. > > Mark > > On 10/4/07, *Eric Dalquist* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Mark, > > I'm going through and reviewing deprecated code in the trunk. In > DistributedLayoutManager the getUserLayoutDOM is marked as deprecated > but there are no comments as to why or what the alternative is. Could > you provide any insight here? > > -Eric > > > -- > You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL > PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
