portals-pluto-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Hepper <sthep...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Adding JSR-286 API jar to a Maven repository
Date Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:51:00 GMT
Ralph Goers wrote:
> Stefan Hepper wrote:
>> Ralph Goers wrote:
>>
>>> We also have a requirement to have our theme process some portlets 
>>> differently than others. Ideally, a portlet (and pages for that 
>>> matter) should be able to have attributes associated with them in 
>>> the portlet.xml that the theme can interrogate.
>>>
>> The portlet can do this today: it can set things as init params in 
>> the portlet.xml or as response properties at runtime.
> I don't recall reading how those are made available to the theme.
Given that themes are not part of JSR 286 this will be vendor specific.

>>> We also have to share attributes between portlets and several 
>>> servlets.  Our current vendor supports this including in servlet 
>>> filters in front of the portal. I haven't read the spec in a draft 
>>> or two, but I assume sharing is still limited to shared render 
>>> parameters. I have no idea why this limitation exists. I heard 
>>> something about it being not implementable in all containers, but 
>>> that doesn't make sense since the portal we are using runs in 
>>> virtually every container.
>>>
>> No, the spec does not limit the sharing of parameters to only 
>> portlets, but on the other side, how would a portal implementation 
>> know that a URL targeted to a servlet should contain the current 
>> shared render parameters?
> Our portal requires that shared parameters be namespaced and the 
> portal be configured with the namespaces to share. They are available 
> to everything (including action requests). This may not be ideal but 
> it is better than nothing. We end up having to leverage our vendor's 
> post login hook and then store our data in the servlet session.
>>> In short, the spec allows me to build fairly simple portlets but is 
>>> completely deficient in when it comes to building applications made 
>>> up of groups of related portlets.
>>>
>> I completely disagree with that assessment. If you have a loosely 
>> coupled portlet component model in your mind JSR 286 will provide you 
>> with many things to create really complex applications based on 
>> different portlets in different portlet apps.
>> If you expect that JSR 286 will provide you a model where you can 
>> create larger, pre-packaged apps that consists of pages, portlets on 
>> the pages, wires between these portlets, and themes for these pages, 
>> I agree that JSR 286 will not help you here and you need vendor 
>> extensions for now. On the other hand you get this JSR by end of this 
>> year instead of end of 2009....
> To give you a perspective, the application is for online banking. Each 
> of the portlets provides different functionality. However, many of the 
> portlets share the user's account information, etc. Some information, 
> such as the list of accounts, current balance, etc. needs to be 
> retrieved during login and then shared across all the portlets. From a 
> portal perspective it isn't an extraordinarily complex application. We 
> have several portlets on one page that all need access to an account's 
> history for some number of days so they can do various things with it. 
> This kind of stuff is very messy to do with the current portlet spec 
> and 286 doesn't seem to help much.  Having to be tied to one vendor is 
> a problem as it makes it difficult to sell the product to larger 
> banks, which presumably would prefer to use the portal of their choosing.
>
One implementation that works with JSR 286 is that you register for the 
navigationalContextChange event, trigger that event when the page is 
loaded the first time, set the customer id as a shared render parameter. 
For providing the account history to different portlets you would create 
a service that would retrieve this once and cache it and this service 
can be called by different portlets.
> Obviously, I don't want to wait until 2009 - but it sure sounds like 
> I'm going to have to wait anyway.  Frankly, there are only a few items 
> in 286 that are of interest to me, such as support for fragments. For 
> example, I already have portlet filters using Spring.  So I'd gladly 
> wait 6 more months to get some of these larger issues dealt with.
>
What you are asking for takes at least two more years of discussion, not 
just 6 month.

Stefan
> Ralph
>
>



Mime
View raw message