On 29 Mar 2012, at 15:31, Kris Popat wrote:

> 
> 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? 

Yep, that would be useful.

> Or perhaps we could enable/disable widgets or make them invisible or similar?

Could be a good idea - so not deleting anything, just not returning anything. 
That might work. Then again I can see something like that also implemented a 
layer up in things like Rave?

> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to