Re: [Metacello] MetacelloBrowser ui...

>
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 04/25/2011 09:12 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
> Hi Dale. I guess you are already aware of...but ... SUPPOSE that Glamour
> is enough for your needs. Glamour can result in plain Morphic but also
> in seaside. So would be able to have both flavors: image based in
> Glamour for those who want everything image based, and a web alternative
> (for example for Gemstone).
> But...I have no idea how stable/complete the GlamourWeb is, nor if it
> contains what you need.
>
> And finally, did you consider SeasideXUL ?  But I guess it may happens
> what you don't want: spend more time in the  framework than in your job :(
>
> I don't have Glamour ported to GemStone (has it been ported to Squeak?) and I don't know if I gain in the end ... Can one build a wizard in Glamour ? ... I've spent a lot of time trying to bend OmniBrowser to my will, but there are some things that are just not easy to do in OmniBrowser ... I don't know myself if Glamour can do what i have in mind or how much bending to my will it will take:)
>
>
> I don't know that neither.
>  
> If someone built a wizard in Glamour for creating a complex configuration (like Seaside or Moose) then it might be enough to motivate my to attempt the port:)
>
> But if is up to me, I am going to go with something I already know (I just don't have enough time to do what I know, let alone what I don't know)
>
> I already pretty much know what I would have to do to do a wizard for a web browser ...
>
> I appreciate the suggestions to use framework x, y, or z to solve the problem, but I am not an expert in any of the frameworks, and if a framework isn't ported to GemStone is it worth porting the framework to GemStone only to find that it doesn't fill the bill? Conversely if I build the wizard in technology z and then find out that it is very difficult to port to GemStone, where am I?
>
>
> If fact, what I was thinking is that from Glamour you can generate the Seaside output, so for Gemstone you don't need to port anything, just use the seaside components generated from Glamour (be careful, this is how I think Glamour-seaside works but maybe I am wrong and you need glamour anyway)
>  
> Using a web framework I am very confident that I could get a model/ui built that does the job and is portable to all three platforms ... I can't say that (with confidence) for any other approach...
>
>
> Sure. But it is realy really bad to see we don't have a single way of creating portable browsers/wizzard or whatever they are called between 3 dialects.
>
>
> --
> Mariano
> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
>

> On 04/26/2011 02:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Glamour should be able to accommodate your requests. Just a note, Glamour is not a user interface framework, it is a browser framework, and it's goal is to help you browse and manipulate data.
>>
>> I have a bit of time this week and I could work on this. I propose to start from a list of use cases. When I say use cases I do not mean user interface use cases. I would be interested in the activities that you would like to accomplish.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>>
>
> What resources does Glamour require? ... For GemStone, OmniBrowser is the only framework supported ... there is no native Morphic, so because OmniBrowser was architected with a small intefact between Morphic and the Browser model, I was able to "make it work" with GemStone as the server and Pharo as the client ...
>
> Sooo that is the main limiting factor in "porting" Glamour to GemStone ...
>
> The use case of the moment is providing support for constructing complex configurations, including conditional packages ... the works ... I have a concept of how I'd like to accomplish this, but it has not fully emerged as something that I can completely articulate ... I haven't drawn any pictures either, so the only picture is in my brain:)
>
> The short term goal would be to improve the simple interface reachable by the +Configuration button ... There we have several steps that are performed in a series of dialog boxes, so just putting the individual operations into a single window with forms fill out for textual items and drag/drop from a list of packages for the initial specification ...
>
> This would give us a starting point to work towards the complexity of specifying something like Moose or Seaside ... where required/included packages are specified and specs are moved around between conditional sections ... Projects are dropped onto the version window from a list of projects and then the basic template (name, configuration name and repository) can be editted expanded ...
>
> Dale

> dale
>
> nick should be working on remote tools for his phd and may be gemstone could be a validation too.
>
> Stef
>
> On Apr 26, 2011, at 11:27 PM, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>
>> On 04/26/2011 02:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Glamour should be able to accommodate your requests. Just a note, Glamour is not a user interface framework, it is a browser framework, and it's goal is to help you browse and manipulate data.
>>>
>>> I have a bit of time this week and I could work on this. I propose to start from a list of use cases. When I say use cases I do not mean user interface use cases. I would be interested in the activities that you would like to accomplish.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Doru
>>>
>>
>> What resources does Glamour require? ... For GemStone, OmniBrowser is the only framework supported ... there is no native Morphic, so because OmniBrowser was architected with a small intefact between Morphic and the Browser model, I was able to "make it work" with GemStone as the server and Pharo as the client ...
>>
>> Sooo that is the main limiting factor in "porting" Glamour to GemStone ...
>>
>> The use case of the moment is providing support for constructing complex configurations, including conditional packages ... the works ... I have a concept of how I'd like to accomplish this, but it has not fully emerged as something that I can completely articulate ... I haven't drawn any pictures either, so the only picture is in my brain:)
>>
>> The short term goal would be to improve the simple interface reachable by the +Configuration button ... There we have several steps that are performed in a series of dialog boxes, so just putting the individual operations into a single window with forms fill out for textual items and drag/drop from a list of packages for the initial specification ...
>>
>> This would give us a starting point to work towards the complexity of specifying something like Moose or Seaside ... where required/included packages are specified and specs are moved around between conditional sections ... Projects are dropped onto the version window from a list of projects and then the basic template (name, configuration name and repository) can be editted expanded ...
>>
>> Dale
>

> Nick, Doru,
>
> I am obviously interested in this ... The current OmniBrowser-based "remote tools suite" for GemStone is adequate, but not ideal ... the cut point for the interface between GemStone and Pharo (the client GUI) is at the update:/changed: layer which can be VERY CHATTY across the wire ...
>
> I am intrigued by the idea of javascript-browser-based tools, but development tools in the browser will have to be "different" than the traditional image-based tools, just because the browser itself is different ...
>
> I would like to understand where the basic cut point for Glamour is and find out if there is a natural point to "insert the wire" between the Morphic-window and the server ...
>
> Since GemStone has no native gui, all tools must be remote:)
>
> Dale
>
> On 04/26/2011 02:45 PM, stephane ducasse wrote:
>> dale
>>
>> nick should be working on remote tools for his phd and may be gemstone could be a validation too.
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On Apr 26, 2011, at 11:27 PM, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/26/2011 02:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Glamour should be able to accommodate your requests. Just a note, Glamour is not a user interface framework, it is a browser framework, and it's goal is to help you browse and manipulate data.
>>>>
>>>> I have a bit of time this week and I could work on this. I propose to start from a list of use cases. When I say use cases I do not mean user interface use cases. I would be interested in the activities that you would like to accomplish.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Doru
>>>>
>>>
>>> What resources does Glamour require? ... For GemStone, OmniBrowser is the only framework supported ... there is no native Morphic, so because OmniBrowser was architected with a small intefact between Morphic and the Browser model, I was able to "make it work" with GemStone as the server and Pharo as the client ...
>>>
>>> Sooo that is the main limiting factor in "porting" Glamour to GemStone ...
>>>
>>> The use case of the moment is providing support for constructing complex configurations, including conditional packages ... the works ... I have a concept of how I'd like to accomplish this, but it has not fully emerged as something that I can completely articulate ... I haven't drawn any pictures either, so the only picture is in my brain:)
>>>
>>> The short term goal would be to improve the simple interface reachable by the +Configuration button ... There we have several steps that are performed in a series of dialog boxes, so just putting the individual operations into a single window with forms fill out for textual items and drag/drop from a list of packages for the initial specification ...
>>>
>>> This would give us a starting point to work towards the complexity of specifying something like Moose or Seaside ... where required/included packages are specified and specs are moved around between conditional sections ... Projects are dropped onto the version window from a list of projects and then the basic template (name, configuration name and repository) can be editted expanded ...
>>>
>>> Dale
>>
>

> Hi Dale,
>
> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>
> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>
> 1. download
> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>
> 2. run:
> WAKom startOn: 8081
>
> 3. go to:
> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>
> Cheers,
> Doru

> On 04/26/2011 05:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>> Hi Dale,
>>
>> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
>> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>>
>> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>>
>> 1. download
>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>>
>> 2. run:
>> WAKom startOn: 8081
>>
>> 3. go to:
>> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>
> I'll hold off exploring the scope of the Glamour port until I see if Glamour can be used to construct the configuration wizard:)
>
> I'm not skeptical as much as I am very busy...
>
> Did I provide you with enough info for the use case?

> Hi Dale,
>
> On 27 Apr 2011, at 02:22, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>
>> On 04/26/2011 05:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>> Hi Dale,
>>>
>>> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
>>> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>>>
>>> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>>>
>>> 1. download
>>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>>>
>>> 2. run:
>>> WAKom startOn: 8081
>>>
>>> 3. go to:
>>> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Doru
>>
>> I'll hold off exploring the scope of the Glamour port until I see if Glamour can be used to construct the configuration wizard:)
>>
>> I'm not skeptical as much as I am very busy...
>>
>> Did I provide you with enough info for the use case?
>
> Not really :).

>
> Am 2011-04-27 um 09:33 schrieb Tudor Girba:
>
>>> […]
>>> Is it usable in Squeak4.2?
>>
>> I never tried but you are welcome to. If you do, please let us know what happened :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>>
>
> Can you give me some starting points?
>
> So Long,
> -Tobias
>

>
> On Apr 26, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>
>> Hi Dale,
>>
>> On 27 Apr 2011, at 02:22, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/26/2011 05:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>>> Hi Dale,
>>>>
>>>> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
>>>> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>>>>
>>>> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>>>>
>>>> 1. download
>>>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>>>>
>>>> 2. run:
>>>> WAKom startOn: 8081
>>>>
>>>> 3. go to:
>>>> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Doru
>>>
>>> I'll hold off exploring the scope of the Glamour port until I see if Glamour can be used to construct the configuration wizard:)
>>>
>>> I'm not skeptical as much as I am very busy...
>>>
>>> Did I provide you with enough info for the use case?
>>
>> Not really :).
>
> okay?

> Hi,
>
> On 27 Apr 2011, at 03:23, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 26, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dale,
>>>
>>> On 27 Apr 2011, at 02:22, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 04/26/2011 05:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>>>> Hi Dale,
>>>>>
>>>>> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
>>>>> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>>>>>
>>>>> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. download
>>>>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. run:
>>>>> WAKom startOn: 8081
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. go to:
>>>>> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Doru
>>>>
>>>> I'll hold off exploring the scope of the Glamour port until I see if Glamour can be used to construct the configuration wizard:)
>>>>
>>>> I'm not skeptical as much as I am very busy...
>>>>
>>>> Did I provide you with enough info for the use case?
>>>
>>> Not really :).
>>
>> okay?
>
>
> I re-read the original mail, and indeed there is enough information :). I will try to give it a try. What I saw is that there is basically no dependency between steps. Is that correct? If yes, then all steps would fit in a simple Magritte form.