[BLOSSOM-15] Add "inheritance" to reuse parts of repo dialog configuration in Blossom configured dialogs. Created: 15/Sep/10 Updated: 04/Nov/15 Resolved: 04/Nov/15 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Blossom |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | 1.1 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | Major |
| Reporter: | Danilo Ghirardelli | Assignee: | Tobias Mattsson |
| Resolution: | Won't Do | Votes: | 1 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Template: |
|
| Acceptance criteria: |
Empty
|
| Date of First Response: |
| Description |
|
Add the possibility to re-use dialogs configured in repo as prototypes for Blossom configured dialogs. @DialogFactory(value="my-dialog", prototype="some-other-dialog") When my-dialog (or the dialog for my-paragraph) is created it will include all the tabs and controls of some-other-dialog. That way you could configure some parts of your dialog in the repository, under a different dialog name. A @TabFactory("Content") method would not create a new tab if one with the label "Content" already exists, instead it would add/remove/edit controls in it. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Danilo Ghirardelli [ 15/Sep/10 ] |
|
At the moment the @TabFactory annotation does not have @Inherited annotation, maybe it should have it but I don't know if this would cause side effects. |
| Comment by Danilo Ghirardelli [ 21/Sep/10 ] |
|
I did a quick test and maybe this would be easy using an hidden (and undocumented) Magnolia feature, the "reference". this.tab = new DialogTab(); catch (RepositoryException e) { // ignore } this.tab.setLabel(label); you can pass a "fakeConfigNode" to the init method. If that node has only a property named "reference" with the path (in config repo) of the "parent" tab, everything works just like asked in the issue (DialogControlImpl.initializeConfig takes care of everything). The problem is just to create a temporary content with a single property with the value provided by the annotation. |
| Comment by Michael Mühlebach [ 04/Nov/15 ] |
|
Given the thousands of other issues we have open that are more highly requested, we won't be able to address this issue in the foreseeable future. Instead we will focus on issues with a higher impact, and more votes. |