On 29 Mar 2012, at 15:06, Paul Sharples wrote: > On 29/03/2012 15:03, Scott Wilson wrote: >> On 29 Mar 2012, at 14:52, Paul Sharples wrote: >> >>> On 29/03/2012 14:39, Ross Gardler wrote: >>>> On 29 March 2012 14:31, Scott Wilson<[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>> >>>>> We've now removed the UI client from trunk, the only UI now is a >>>>> HTML-only demo that lets you preview widgets (thanks Ross for the >>>>> improvements to this - I like the filter especially!) >>>> I'd like to turn the navigation part into a widget, that shouldn't be >>>> hard the way it is currently implemented. Just need to find a little >>>> time to do it. This is *not* a blocker though. It is one more step >>>> towards extracting all the UI functionality out of core. >>>> >>>>> Widgets >>>>> ====== >>>>> Drop into /deploy folder, or use REST API. The only function not >>>>> supported outside of the REST API is deleting widgets. >>>> So how do we delete a widget in a running instance of Wookie? Seems >>>> like a necessary feature (but not a blocker). >>> I presume you'd use the RESTAPI - see >>> org.apache.wookie.tests.functional.WidgetControllerTest for an example. >> To be honest I can't think of another way to do it. You could watch the >> unpacked widget folder, and if it vanishes trigger a delete, but that >> bothers me a bit as it may not be the intention, and deleting widgets has >> lots of side-effects (deleting related instances, preferences). > > Agreed, I don't think thats a good way to go.
Should I add it to the connector? Or perhaps we could enable/disable widgets or make them invisible or similar? > >> >>>>> The question I have is: is this sufficient to consider WOOKIE-262 >>>>> completed? >>>> I'm happy to close it and add a new lower priority issue on the delete >>>> widget requirement above. Also happy to lower the priority with the >>>> delete widget requirement remaining in the original issue. >>> I guess this probably covers it. If we find anything else we've missed >>> then we can open a new issue for it (more specific) >>> The only other thing is that WOOKIE-262 also mentions a command line >>> management utility (is this a provided .bat and .sh script?) >> That was the original intention - but maybe thats not needed now? > > We could just open a new issue for it and give it a lower priority. > >>> Paul >>> >>>>> If so, I'll get on with sorting out the remaining documentation so I can >>>>> close WOOKIE-19& WOOKIE-15. >>>> This email is a good start for FAQ documentation. >>>> >>>> Ross >>>> >> >
