I have some code (Forms/Frames) in the repository, is there anyway to disable the 'use' option. I only want objects in the repository to be 'inherited' or copied.
And is there a way to set the default to be 'inherited'
Have looked at the XML in the RADStudioRepository.xml and there is no obvious fields to add/edit.
Thanks
There has indeed never been a way to specify in the object repository for a form or frame to be "inherit only".
Not in the current RADStudioRepository.xml way of specifying what is in the object repository, nor in the old way (I forgot the config name back in the Delphi 2..7 days).
What you can do is suggest this as a new feature for a future Delphi version at http://qc.embarcadero.com
I think it is an interesting feature request, and would upvote such a request. So let us know if you create such a request.
Related
I was hopping to have an easy way to customize the display behavior of the Grails fields plugin after reading its docs, but I just realized that it demands an enormous effort as there is no available templates to start from.
I can see the display functionality is hard-coded in FormFieldsTagLib (from methods like renderDefaultInput() ) but I think it is imperative to have the templates themselves (or a way to generate them, somewhat like generating static scaffolding in Grails).
I can see no consistent (and reasonable) way to customize display behaviors for the Grails fields plugin without that. Am I missing something?
Imagine the use case where someone wants to change the boolean default rendering just to display the field label after (and not before) the checkbox, and keep it available to all the boolean fields within its application. Which concerns will he need to handle regarding if the field is required, has errors, prefix and so on? When all he needed was just moving two divs around.
Grails version: 2.5.4, fields-plugin version: 1.5.1
You aren't missing something. You'd have to re-create the existing implementation of each field type rendering in a template for use with the plugin. There isn't a way to generate a file to start with (like scaffolding).
I won't bore you with the historical reason as to why this is the case, but if you do create a set of base templates it would be a good idea to contribute back to the plugin.
I had an issue with the <f:table> tag, and found this post, which led me to find the base or default template inside the plugin repo.
Take a look at
https://github.com/grails3-plugins/fields/tree/master/grails-app/views
That may help you finding some default templates, along with the official doc and this answer on where to put the override.
Hope it helps you.
I have searched for days with no solution in sight.
I need multiple Chromium instances in one single application and each of this instance logins to the same site with different account (ex: outlook.com).
I tried this solution but there's no "OnGetCookieManager" event in DECF3 new version. Apparently there was a related bug and event onGetCookieManager was removed in the 1547 CEF3.
I tried this but it doesn't work too.
Is this really possible? How?
I'm using DCEF3 (revision: 0cc175e7a629) and Delphi XE3.
Here's what CEF3 maintainer told me:
"Cookies can be stored globally, per request context or something else entirely. It depends on whether you pass a CefRequestContext to CreateBrowser*() and what you return from CefRequestContextHandler::GetCookieManager."
I'm not entirely sure how CreateBrowser is exposed in Delphi (I only use the C++ API), but I can confirm that GetCookieManager still exists in trunk (as the only method of CefRequestContextHandler).
PLEASE NOTE: None of the answers in the link above (which I don't seem to be able to remove) helped me. As I explain below, I had already tried all that stuff
I have a web site, developed in VS2013 using ASP.NET MVC5/WebAPI2, which has several related projects such as a service layer, repository layer, etc. Down at the bottom of the stack is a class library that holds an EF model. I have separated the actual entities into another class library, to allow them to be reused without requiring the model library.
All of this has been working fine. The web site was running, and I could make calls to the WebAPI methods as well.
I just uploaded the latest version to the production server, and all is working fine there. Then came back to VS to carry on work, and when I try to run up the web site, I get an exception
Unable to load the specified metadata resource
Searching around, it seems that the cure for this is to modify the connection string to point to the actual assembly name instead of using the default . I have two problems with this, first is that none of the config files in the solution have been touched today (by me at least, and the file history form source control confirms this), so there's no reason why it should suddenly stop working after being deployed, and second, even if I add the assembly name, I get the same exception.
Anyone any ideas what I can do? I'm completely stuffed now. Can't do anything.
Edit: I tried again to specify the assembly in the connection string, and now get the exception Unable to resolve assembly. I have checked the assembly name in a decompiler, and I'm pretty sure got it right.
Edit again: I just pulled the version that I deployed from source control, and that gives the same exception, so I'm sure this is nothing to do with any files I've changed (or even that have been changed by VS). The version on the production server is still working, but the source code that drives that exact same version gives the exception. So, I'm certain that the answer is NOT to be found in the myriad other versions of this question, but is somewhere else.
Found the problem, and am posting it here in the hope that it will help someone else, as I don't think this was clear in any of the other posts on this issue.
I have a layered solution, with the web project referencing a service layer, which references a repository layer which in turn references the model project. It seems to for EF to work, whichever layer actually causes the database to be accessed requires a reference to the model project. My service layer project, which was where ToList() was being called (thus enumerating the query, and causing the database to be hit) didn't have a reference to the model project, so was failing to load the assembly.
I didn't need to alter the metadata part of the connection string either, as once the service layer had a reference to the model project, it was able to find the resources by itself. Having said that, one thing I did learn from all of this is that you can speed up the creation of the model (slightly) by specifying the assembly containing the resources explicitly, as this saves the framework having to search through all loaded assemblies to find them. I'm not sure if this will make any noticeable difference, but it can't harm.
I still can't explain how this had been working up until now, and suddenly stopped, as I hadn't changed any references, nor the way I was doing the data access. Still, it seems to be working now, which is all that matters.
Hope this helps someone.
This is a (actually it is several) follow-up question to my previous question on F# Type Providers and Continuous Integration.
It seems to me that it would be a good idea to use the SqlDataConnection type provider as a compile-time check that the code/database integrity remains intact in feature-branch driven development; you would know at every commit/build that no changes have been made to the code that has not also been applied to the database, assuming that building the database is also a part of your CI process.
However, a couple of questions arise:
The name (as well as the location) of the config file is not the same at compile time as at runtime, e.g. app.config -> MyApp.exe.config, which will result in a runtime error if you try to use
SqlDataConnection<ConnectionStringName="DbConnection", ConfigFile="app.config">
(Actually, specifying ConfigFile="app.config" is not necessary, since it is the default value.)
The runtime error can be avoided by copying the app.config file to the output directory (there’s a setting for that), but that would result in having both an app.config and a MyApp.exe.config file in the output directory. Not very pretty. Adding a separate configuration file for type providers would be another solution, but imho that’s not very pretty either.
Question: Has anyone come up with a more elegant solution to this problem?
The next problem arises when you come to the build server. It is most likely that you don’t want to compile against the same database as you did while developing, thus requiring a different connection string. And yes, in production you’d need yet another one.
Question: How do you go about solving this in the most convenient way? Remember, the solution has to be a working part of a CI process!
This strategy would require generating the database on each build at the build server, probably from a baseline script with some feature/sprint update scripts.
Question: Has anyone tried this and how did it affect build times? If yes, how did you create this step?
At runtime you can use the GetDataContext overload that accepts a connection string. See here: Providing connection string to Linq-To-Sql data provider
I am familiar with the solution that #Gustavo proposes, but I’ve always felt that there is something fishy about it. Something about having to specify the connection string twice… However, when I once again got the same reply, I slowly started to realize that the answer must be correct, and that it’s me who’s thinking wrong. These are my conclusions:
The reply states that you can use the GetDataContext overload that accepts a connection string. If you change this to should, things become clearer, at least to me.
The thing is that I’ve been thinking of the class definition as both a compile-time directive and as a run-time variable, but even though this is possible, it is hardly a good idea. The default value of the ConfigFile argument is as we’ve already seen “app.config”, but that file doesn’t exist (with that name) at run-time, so it doesn’t make sense to try to use it, thus leaving GetDataContext as the only reasonable option. I suggest that you do this:
Keep your compile-time settings in a file called compilation.config (or whatever you prefer) and specify this file for usage in the class definition.
Use the GetDataContext overload that accepts a connection string for run-time resolution and specify this connection string in the app.config file.
You will end up with something looking like this:
type private dbSchema = SqlEntityConnection<ConnectionStringName="DbConnection", ConfigFile="compilation.config">
let private db = dbSchema.GetDataContext(ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings.["DbConnection"].ConnectionString)
Heck, this even supports the SRP; compile-time settings in one file and run-time settings in another!
Regarding the rest of my questions, I assume that the answer lies in some scripting in the Continuous Deployment pipeline. Still interested in other solutions though.
TFS stores information about who created or who activated a work item and for some reason checks its validity whenever the work item is modified.
When a user is deleted from active directory or renamed in active directory, all work items even slightly has connection with the user can not be modified. Usually the error message is something like ...
TF20015: The field 'Activated By' contains the value 'blah blah blah' that is not in the list of supported values.
I've found a blogpost which recommends tweaking the TFS database, which is something not supported nor recommended by Microsoft.
What can be done to resolve this?
Thanks...
e-mre
Caveat: I'm not sure that this will work, and right now I'm not in a position to test it. However, I've had success with this approach on some other fields.
If you use the TFS Power Tools to edit the work item type definition, you should be able to change the Activated By field's rules and add an ALLOWEXISTINGVALUE rule to it. This might allow you to save those records when the AD name changes.
We've used this with some success with the Assigned To field.
I've seen this behaviour. It occurs if someone who activated a work item is removed from Active Directory (leaves the company) or if they change their name (gets married).
It's simple to fix, you just need to change the work item status from Active to Pending then back to Active this will change the "Activated By" field to the person chaging the status and the problem will be resolved.
Are you using TFS 2008? I seem to remember that this issue is fixed in 2010 (but I might have dreamt that)
If you have a lot of work items this blog might have a solution that helps automate the fix.