10:06 p.m.
Peter Palaga created GTNPORTAL-2751:
---------------------------------------
Summary: <priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge
importMode
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public (Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed from
Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
11:20 p.m.
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl...
]
Nick Scavelli commented on GTNPORTAL-2751:
------------------------------------------
I think this might be a bug with the NavigationImporter because it looks like priority is
ignored for overwrite as well. It also should be noted that priority only seems to matter
for the group navigation, as changing the priority on classic and mobile seemed to do
nothing. Some clarification from someone with expertise in this area would be helpful.
<priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge importMode
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed
from Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
8:36 a.m.
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl...
]
Peter Palaga commented on GTNPORTAL-2751:
-----------------------------------------
Thanks for the comment, Nick.
I do not know how exactly the ordering using {{priority}} is implemented, but it indeed
makes sense only for the kinds of navigation for which there may exist more than one piece
of the same kind - i.e. for group and user navigations.
There is no point in stating {{<priority>}} for portal navigations because there is
always only one navigation per portal. I see this as a next reason for making the
{{<priority>}} optional.
<priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge importMode
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed
from Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
4:49 p.m.
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl...
]
Nick Scavelli commented on GTNPORTAL-2751:
------------------------------------------
One of the issues that may arise however is what the priority would be for navigation.xml
that doesn't provide it. Internally it's an int so it must have some value. Also
it seems that's it's quite good to have priority as required for group and user
navigations, so what do you do if they don't provide one ?
<priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge importMode
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed
from Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
9:42 p.m.
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl...
]
Peter Palaga commented on GTNPORTAL-2751:
-----------------------------------------
I need to correct myself: there cannot be several user navigations, there is always just
one, like it is the case with site navigation.
bq. One of the issues that may arise however is what the priority would be for
navigation.xml that doesn't provide it. Internally it's an int so it must have
some value. Also it seems that's it's quite good to have priority as required for
group and user navigations, so what do you do if they don't provide one ?
The internal {{int}} can be handled somehow: it can be changed to {{Integer}} or one can
introduce a special value, e.g. -1 for the undefined state.
In Group navs, where it is logically required one can (i) either throw an exception or
(ii) assume some default value, e.g. 1. (ii) is probably better.
<priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge importMode
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed
from Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
9:58 p.m.
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl...
]
Nick Scavelli commented on GTNPORTAL-2751:
------------------------------------------
I think priority should be considered for site navigations (which is why I wonder if
it's a bug). For example if I want mobile to appear before classic in the navigation
menu, priority seems like the logical place to look considering it effects group
navigations.
<priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge importMode
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed
from Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
9:51 a.m.
[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl...
]
Peter Palaga commented on GTNPORTAL-2751:
-----------------------------------------
bq. I want mobile to appear before classic in the navigation menu
Yes, that is indeed a valid use case. But it still makes sense to leave
{{<priority>}} unspecified when I use {{merge importMode}} in a Portal Extension and
I do not want to touch the ordering already available in the default GateIn installation.
<priority> in navigation.xml files ignored for merge importMode
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GTNPORTAL-2751
URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GTNPORTAL-2751
Project: GateIn Portal
Issue Type: Task
Security Level: Public(Everyone can see)
Reporter: Peter Palaga
Steps to reproduce:
Clone the Portal Extension Quickstart and deploy it changing the {{<priority>}}
value in
{{war/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/conf/sample-ext/portal/group/platform/administrators/navigation.xml}}.
NOT OK: The changes have no effect, because priority is ignored in
{{org.exoplatform.portal.mop.importer.NavigationImporter.perform()}} with {{importMode}}
{{merge}}.
h3. Solution Proposal A
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Explicitly state in the documentation [1] that {{<priority>}} is considered only
if not already set (first wins).
h3. Solution Proposal B
* Make {{<priority>}} optional in {{gatein_objects}} XSD and
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}}
* Change the behavior of
{{NavigationMarshaller.unmarshalNavigation(StaxNavigator<Element>)}} to the effect
that {{<priority>}} is handled in the same way as navigation nodes: it is used or
ignored according to the chosen {{importMode}}. Esp. for {{importMode}} {{merge}} the last
read {{<priority>}} should win.
* Document it in [1]
For both A and B the most or all occutences of {{<priority>}} should be removed
from Portal Extension Quickstart.
[1] [https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/GTNPORTAL35/Portal+Navigation+Confi...]
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
4225
days inactive
4228
days old
6 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Nick Scavelli (JIRA) -
Peter Palaga (JIRA)