Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 13 Next »

[00:03:11 CDT(-0500)] * deuce (n=deuce@ip70-190-171-187.ph.ph.cox.net) has joined ##uportal
[09:20:20 CDT(-0500)] * EricDalquist (n=dalquist@bohemia.doit.wisc.edu) has joined ##uportal
[09:23:06 CDT(-0500)] * deuce_ (n=deuce@ip70-190-171-187.ph.ph.cox.net) has joined ##uportal
[10:40:19 CDT(-0500)] * deuce_ (n=deuce@uni1.unicon.net) has joined ##uportal
[10:46:54 CDT(-0500)] * andrewpetro (n=microcli@uni1.unicon.net) has joined ##uportal
[11:54:44 CDT(-0500)] * dmccallum (n=dmccallu@uni1.unicon.net) has joined ##uportal
[12:10:07 CDT(-0500)] * deuce_ (n=deuce@uni1.unicon.net) has joined ##uportal
[12:25:09 CDT(-0500)] * shawnlonas (n=shawn@uni1.unicon.net) has joined ##uportal
[12:42:47 CDT(-0500)] * peterk (i=[U2FsdGV@66.226.77.81) has joined ##uportal
[12:43:27 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> deuce_: I don't think it makes sense to have both ways of passing params to/from the servant portlets. We should either decide that the servant/client should be aware of the parameters that are coming from another portlet, or make it transparent. Allowing for both alternatives would just add confusion.
[12:44:07 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> Can you briefly describe why would using portlet-scoped params directly would be useful?
[12:58:07 CDT(-0500)] * shawnlonas (n=shawn@uni1.unicon.net) has left ##uportal
[13:06:02 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> peter, for example, the permissions manager servant needs to know what owner, target and activities when utilized from the groups manager
[13:07:15 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> and it's the web flow artifacts that are the recipients of this information and have no access to their window ids .. so they cannot access attributes set by the current ServantUtil
[13:07:38 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> they can, however, access portlet scoped attributes in the portlet session
[13:10:54 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> you mean webflow constructs can't access information from some arbitrary static method call
[13:10:56 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> right?
[13:11:31 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> not the ones in ServantUtil
[13:12:26 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> they don't have direct access to the portlet session
[13:13:07 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> weird :/
[13:13:11 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> er .. PorletRequest
[13:13:58 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> yeah it's that abstraction that allows them to be used within a servant or portlet context i believe
[13:14:05 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> servlet
[13:14:07 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> (smile)
[13:15:53 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> hmm ... on one hand, I think that we should have a consistent (i.e. a single) way of passing attributes between servants and clinets. On the other, I can picture weird problems arizing because servant overrides some param that the client doesn't expect or the other way around ...
[13:16:40 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> instead .. perhaps we should think about how we could use controllers directly for servants
[13:17:19 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> like ICallableController
[13:17:24 CDT(-0500)] <peterk> but they would still have to pass params to the servants somehow
[13:17:39 CDT(-0500)] <deuce_> it would be through that interface

  • No labels