[aerogear-dev] Aerogear Forge Plugin

Corinne Krych corinnekrych at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 15:07:38 EST 2013


Hi Seb

Same error on Fedora with jdk1.7.0_09.
Running with forge 1.2.0.Final

Could it be the forge version?

++
Corinne

On 26 February 2013 10:48, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Richard Kennard <
> richard at kennardconsulting.com> wrote:
>
>> Seb,
>>
>> It sounds like there may be some convergence here. Your 'macros' library
>> may end up looking very similar to Metawidget's existing HTML5
>> WidgetBuilder. And
>> your 'composition plugins' may end up similar to Metawidget's
>> LayoutDecorators and Layouts.
>>
>> I'd like to make sure you're not re-inventing the wheel here? Is your
>> main driver that you prefer writing templates in Freemarker to Java code?
>>
>
> Absolutely :) ! A user should be able to read and understand a template /
> overload them and not forced to write a Java class, a mid-term vision is to
> be more and more polyglot.
> Seb
>
>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>> On 26/02/2013 8:31 PM, Sebastien Blanc wrote:
>> > Hi Richard,
>> > Thanks for your remarks and questions, see my comments inline.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Richard Kennard <
>> richard at kennardconsulting.com <mailto:richard at kennardconsulting.com>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     Hi Vineet,
>> >
>> >     Thanks for your detailed response.
>> >
>> >     I'm not opposed to the idea of a FreemarkerWidget (or
>> VelocityWidget, or StringTemplateWidget). Indeed, the early versions of
>> Metawidget looked much like
>> >     you describe: a separate, pluggable inspection layer, then a
>> Metawidget to render it.
>> >
>> >     However, we subsequently got a lot of feedback and did many
>> interviews, adoption studies and case studies. This ultimately led to the
>> architecture of
>> >     pluggable WidgetBuilders, WidgetProcessors and Layouts. Let me give
>> you 3 examples of the feedback we got:
>> >
>> >     1. Widget choice needs to be orthogonal to layout. If you look at
>> your 'master.html.ftl' and 'detail.html.ftl' you have a lot of duplicated
>> code between
>> >     them. Both templates contain <#if... #else to choose between a
>> 'select' box and a 'text' box. This code is going to inflate rapidly once
>> you add your
>> >     date
>> >     pickers, telephone numbers, URLs etc. to the mix. Worse, such code
>> will need to be duplicated across both templates.
>> >
>> >
>> > Vineet is currently  factorizing all the duplicated code into
>> Freemarker's Macros, this Macros library will be shared along the different
>> plugins.
>> >
>> >
>> >     2. Equally, layout needs to be orthogonal to the wider page. Say I
>> decide I want to use tables with rows and columns, instead of a div-based
>> layout.
>> >     Or say
>> >     I want to use different CSS classes to your 'control-group' and
>> 'controls'. I will have to do it in both templates. But what is *actually*
>> different
>> >     about
>> >     the templates is the choice of search buttons/results versus
>> save/cancel buttons. So the 'middle bit' of each page needs to be
>> orthogonal. This will get
>> >     worse as you add more templates, such as separate 'search', 'view'
>> and 'edit' templates (see the JSF scaffold).
>> >
>> > With Forge 2.0 in mind, where Plugins/addons will be able to be
>> dependent from each other, inherit from each other, we plan to end up with
>> some basic
>> > plugins which will offer a lot of flexibility to deliver "Composition
>> plugins". We are also going to introduce a lot of convention over
>> configuration but
>> > with keeping in mind that the user can always override the conventions.
>> >
>> >
>> >     3. Developers like to use third-party widget libraries, and also
>> in-house custom widget libraries. If I want to add RichFaces, or
>> PrimeFaces, or a
>> >     mixture
>> >     of both, I want to be able to do so in a way that is orthogonal to
>> all of the above
>> >
>> >     So my concern would be that a FreemarkerWidget would tightly couple
>> widget choice (WidgetBuilders) and layout, and not allow widget processing
>> (which is
>> >     important for other reasons I haven't touched upon). Freemarker
>> does, I agree, offer an attractive level of immedicay and ease-of-editing
>> templates.
>> >     But I
>> >     wonder what your thoughts are on how it scales for some of the
>> points above?
>> >
>> >
>> > "Scaling" will be partly solved by the new architecture explained
>> above. For sure, there will always be situations where the user wants to
>> introduce his
>> > supra cool custom widget that don't fits without a lot of hacking but
>> IMO that's beyond the scope of scaffolding. Scaffolding is just to "boost
>> up" a new
>> > project, it's a one time action,  for sure, we can offer entry points
>> for customization but we can't (or don't want to) cover all the specific
>> situations.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Seb
>> >
>> >
>> >     Regards,
>> >
>> >     Richard.
>> >
>> >     > On 22 February 2013 13:56, Vineet Reynolds Pereira <
>> vpereira at redhat.com <mailto:vpereira at redhat.com> <mailto:
>> vpereira at redhat.com
>> >     <mailto:vpereira at redhat.com>>> wrote:
>> >     >
>> >     >     Hi Richard,
>> >     >
>> >     >        I'm glad you brought this up, since we've been looking to
>> provide feedback once we've finalized on our usage of the Metawidget APIs.
>> By the way,
>> >     >     I'm the one responsible for the use (or abuse) of Metawidget
>> in this manner.
>> >     >
>> >     >        The rationale behind the use of Metawidget inspectors
>> alone, is mostly because we want to allow users to modify the generated
>> scaffold. One
>> >     of the
>> >     >     examples thrown around was to enable users to generate
>> master-detail views instead of the plain CRUD forms generated by Forge.
>> Another driving
>> >     factor
>> >     >     was the need to create or enable creation of scaffold
>> generators for several JS frameworks including but not restricted to
>> AngularJS, Backbone.js,
>> >     >     Aerogear etc. Furthermore, there is also a possibility of
>> users needing to bring in plugins and extensions to these frameworks, like
>> Angular-UI or
>> >     >     Backbone.Forms, since the base frameworks may not satisfy all
>> needs. From my understanding of the Metawidget pipeline and it's use in the
>> Forge
>> >     Faces
>> >     >     and (the earlier) Aerogear scaffold plugins, this would have
>> been possible if a metawidget were created for every use case (one per
>> framework, per
>> >     >     widget-type). We attempted to bring in the use of templates
>> written in a familiar templating langu!
>> >     >      age (like Freemarker/Velocity/StringTemplate) into the
>> scaffold generation phase to make it easier for users to modify the
>> generated scaffold.
>> >     This
>> >     >     is somewhat on the lines of what the Yeoman generators do.
>> >     >
>> >     >        Thanks to the APIs you've made available for the
>> Metawidget pipeline, the inspection results could be processed before
>> feeding them to the
>> >     >     templates. Every scaffold plugin that could potentially be
>> written, would more or less use this approach, with the sole difference
>> being in the
>> >     >     contents of the templates themselves. I hope this explains
>> why I used the Inspectors alone, and not the InspectionResultProcessors and
>> the rest of
>> >     >     the pipeline. The inspectors just fit in naturally into the
>> Forge scaffold generation pipeline.
>> >     >
>> >     >        Based on the above, I personally think that a
>> FreemarkerWidget (or VelocityWidget, or StringTemplateWidget) would be
>> something to investigate.
>> >     >     This is of course a raw idea of mine, and I would like to see
>> if it is possible to use such a metawidget in a type-safe manner with the
>> ability to
>> >     >     configure the templates that it would consume. I'm not sure
>> if creating such a widget would deviate from the intention behind the
>> Metawidget
>> >     project.
>> >     >
>> >     >        As a side note, I'd also like to point out that there has
>> been interest in supporting various additional HTML5 form input types
>> (telephone
>> >     >     numbers, URLs etc.) in the generated scaffold, and this would
>> require extending the JPA/Bean Validation Inspectors in Metawidget.
>> >     >
>> >     >     Best regards,
>> >     >     Vineet
>> >     >
>> >     >     PS: CC'ing the forge-dev list.
>> >     >
>> >     >     ----- Original Message -----
>> >     >     > From: "Richard Kennard" <richard at kennardconsulting.com<mailto:
>> richard at kennardconsulting.com> <mailto:richard at kennardconsulting.com
>> >     <mailto:richard at kennardconsulting.com>>>
>> >     >     > To: aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >     <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
>> >     >     > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:17:29 AM
>> >     >     > Subject: Re: [aerogear-dev] Aerogear Forge Plugin
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > Seb,
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > This looks very cool. I see you have used parts of
>> Metawidget for
>> >     >     > some of the implementation? I'd love to hear your thoughts
>> on how it
>> >     >     > went and/or any
>> >     >     > changes you'd like me to make to Metawidget. For example:
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > 1. You have some code in Html5Scaffold that processes the
>> inspection
>> >     >     > result returned by CompositeInspector. It does things like
>> >     >     > 'Canonicalize all numerical
>> >     >     > types in Java to "number" for HTML5 form input type
>> support' and
>> >     >     > 'Extract simple type name of the relationship types'. Was
>> there a
>> >     >     > reason you didn't factor
>> >     >     > this into a Metawidget InspectionResultProcessor
>> >     >     > (http://metawidget.org/doc/reference/en/html/ch02s03.html)?
>> >     >     > Specifically BaseInspectionResultProcessor has
>> >     >     > some methods to help?
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > 2. You appear to be using FreeMarker templates rather than
>> >     >     > Metawidget's WidgetBuilders, WidgetProcessors and Layouts
>> (see the
>> >     >     > existing Forge JSF scaffold,
>> >     >     > Forge GWT scaffold, and Forge Spring scaffold). Could I ask
>> what the
>> >     >     > reasons were behind this?
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > 3. I have recently implemented a pure client-side, pure
>> run-time,
>> >     >     > AngularJS version of Metawidget. If you were interested in a
>> >     >     > non-static version of your
>> >     >     > scaffold, perhaps you could give it a try?
>> >     >     >
>> http://blog.kennardconsulting.com/2013/01/metawidget-meets-jquery-ui-and-angularjs.html
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > Regards,
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > Richard.
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > On 20/02/2013 11:49 PM, Jay Balunas wrote:
>> >     >     > > Wow!!!  Really awesome work guys!!!
>> >     >     > >
>> >     >     > > On Feb 15, 2013, at 11:15 AM, Sebastien Blanc wrote:
>> >     >     > >
>> >     >     > >> Hi all !
>> >     >     > >> I'm pleased to announce that the first version of the
>> Aerogear
>> >     >     > >> Scaffold Plugin for forge is available !
>> >     >     > >> It's still an alpha but thanks to the excellent work and
>> help from
>> >     >     > >> Vineet we have a working plugin :
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> - CRUD Scaffolding based on your entities.
>> >     >     > >> - One-to-one , many-to-one relation supported.
>> >     >     > >> - AngularJS and bootstrap responsive based.
>> >     >     > >> - Aerogear Pipe and Store used.
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> There is still a lot to do but you can already play with
>> it, a
>> >     >     > >> quickstart is available here and you should be able to
>> create
>> >     >     > >> your first Aerogear App in
>> >     >     > >> 5 minutes ;)
>> https://gist.github.com/sebastienblanc/4961324
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> An example of a generated application can also be found
>> here :
>> >     >     > >> https://github.com/sebastienblanc/scaffoldtester ,
>> please review
>> >     >     > >> the generated code (at
>> >     >     > >> least the JS and HTML) and report it to me and I will
>> update the
>> >     >     > >> templates accordingly.
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> Next steps are :
>> >     >     > >> - Integrate Search feature (using the DataStore filter
>> facilities)
>> >     >     > >> - Integrate Aerogear Pagination (although generic
>> pagination is
>> >     >     > >> present now)
>> >     >     > >> - Integrate jQueryMobile (will probably be another
>> plugin)
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> Enjoy !
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> Seb
>> >     >     > >>
>> >     >     > >> _______________________________________________
>> >     >     > >> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >     >     > >> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >     <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>> <mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> >     <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>>>
>> >     >     > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >     >     > >
>> >     >     > >
>> >     >     > >
>> >     >     > > _______________________________________________
>> >     >     > > aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >     >     > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org<mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
>> >     >     > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > _______________________________________________
>> >     >     > aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >     >     > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org<mailto:
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>>
>> >     >     > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >     >     >
>> >     >
>> >     >     _______________________________________________
>> >     >     aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >     > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >>
>> >     > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >     > _______________________________________________
>> >     > aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >     > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> >
>> >     > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >
>> >     _______________________________________________
>> >     aerogear-dev mailing list
>> >     aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>> >     https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130226/fba64dbb/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list