[MGNLUI-228] AppBuilder vs ContentAppBuilder Created: 27/Nov/12  Updated: 21/Nov/13  Resolved: 27/Jun/13

Status: Closed
Project: Magnolia UI
Component/s: app framework, content app, framework
Affects Version/s: 5.0
Fix Version/s: 5.0

Type: Improvement Priority: Major
Reporter: Espen Jervidalo Assignee: Tobias Mattsson
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: configuration-by-code, content-app, framework
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Issue Links:
causality
caused by MGNLUI-111 workbench definition part of subapp d... Closed
relation
is related to MGNLUI-187 itemsubapp: actions for saving node f... Closed
Template:
Acceptance criteria:
Empty
Task DoD:
[ ]* Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]* Downstream builds green?
[ ]* Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]* Tests
[ ]* FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ]  Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
Date of First Response:

 Description   

As the workbenchDefinition is now part of the subapp and no longer on the appDescriptor the builder needs to be revised.
I would prefer just dropping the ContentSubAppDescriptor and just use the SubAppDescriptor.

see Jans notes on MGNLUI-111.



 Comments   
Comment by Espen Jervidalo [ 27/Nov/12 ]

also look into ContactsModule:

some field labels seems to be capitalized (Office Fax Nr) some not (Office phone) ... I don't really care which style you choose (pbly Antti or Andreas should say), but they need to be all written in same style
button labels seem to be completely w/o capitalisation and all lower case

Comment by Andreas Weder [ 05/Dec/12 ]

Do not capitalize field labels, please: so "Office phone", not "Office Phone". Labels are neither names nor headings, but actual language expressions. I'd expect Antti to agree with this as we've recently had a related discussion on capitalization in headings and titles.

Comment by Tobias Mattsson [ 05/Dec/12 ]

AppBuilder and SubAppBuilder are in ui-framework which have no dependencies on any other ui- modules. It serves as the foundation for the whole ui.

ContentAppBuilder and ContentSubAppBuilder however are in ui-admincentral and use classes from ui-model (workbench, actionbar etc).

ContentAppBuilder makes little sense now since the workbench is in the subapp and not on the app directly. It would make sense to merge them into one and make it capable of creating both kinds of subapps:

public class AppBuilder {

    public SubAppBuilder subApp(String name) {
        return new SubAppBuilder(name);
    }

    public SubAppBuilder contentSubApp(String name) {
        return new ContentSubAppBuilder(name);
    }

But this isn't possible without merging ui-framework and ui-model into one single module (also ConfiguredContentSubAppDescriptor would have to be moved from ui-admincentral).

Comment by Mikaël Geljić [ 05/Dec/12 ]

For what my 2 cents are worth, I would also move all content-app/subapp definitions to model and builders to framework. However I'm not sure I get it why model and framework should be merged together?

Comment by Tobias Mattsson [ 05/Dec/12 ]

@Mikael Didnt say should, was just pointing out that we can't have a reference from framework to model. ContentSubAppBuilder cannot be moved to framework because it uses WorkbenchDefinition which is in model.

Generated at Mon Feb 12 08:34:50 CET 2024 using Jira 9.4.2#940002-sha1:46d1a51de284217efdcb32434eab47a99af2938b.