[aerogear-dev] Aerogear Forge Plugin
Sebastien Blanc
scm.blanc at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 16:03:49 EST 2013
And also openJDK or Oracle JDK ?
Just asking because I'm out of ideas :)
Seb
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>wrote:
> Your Forge version is okay ...
> What about your maven version ?
>
> Seb
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:07 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/b95e8db4/attachment-0001.html
More information about the aerogear-dev
mailing list