I'm attempting to create a Product Engine for Apostrophe. I'm having trouble extending the Page Settings form, at the moment I want to add a simple textarea to add a synopsis to the page - eventually I want to add Product settings but I need to get the basics working first.
I've created a form and a settings partial, it's displaying fine and saving the data (with the help of a little hack - might not be correct). The trouble I'm having is when you edit a page the data is not being pulled back in to the form. To be honest I probably doing something fundamentally wrong but I lack experience in Symfony.
My table schema
ccProduct:
tableName: cc_product
actAs:
Timestampable: ~
columns:
page_id:
type: integer
notnull: true
synopsis:
type: text
relations:
Page:
class: aPage
local: page_id
foreign: id
type: one
onDelete: CASCADE
My form ccProductEngineForm.class.php
class ccProductEngineForm extends ccProductForm
{
public function __construct($object = null, $options = array(), $CSRFSecret = null)
{
// when editing the page the values are not show, this is an attempt to get it to work - it still doesn't :(
$page_id = sfContext::getInstance()->getRequest()->getParameter('id');
sfContext::getInstance()->getRequest()->setParameter('page_id', $page_id);
$ccProduct = Doctrine::getTable('ccProduct')->findOneByPageId($page_id);
if ($ccProduct) {
sfContext::getInstance()->getRequest()->setParameter('id', $ccProduct->getId());
}
// aPageForm object is passed in
parent::__construct(null, $options, $CSRFSecret); // construct normally
//$this->mergeForm(new aPageForm($object, $options, $CSRFSecret)); // merge the aPageForm - Nope, ignore it!?
}
public function setup() {
parent::setup();
$this->useFields(array('synopsis'));
$this->widgetSchema->setNameFormat('enginesettings[%s]');
$this->widgetSchema->setFormFormatterName('aPageSettings');
}
protected function doSave($con = null)
{
// page_id is missing! possible bug? BaseaActions.class.php ~ 520
$this->values['page_id'] = sfContext::getInstance()->getRequest()->getParameter('enginesettings[pageid]');
parent::doSave($con);
}
}
Thanks in advance for any help
EDIT:
Thanks for your answer Tom, I'll try to add a little more detail.
I was aware that a page object is passed into the Engine, but I wasn't exactly sure what do to with it - see my confused line of code:
//$this->mergeForm(new aPageForm($object, $options, $CSRFSecret)); // merge the aPageForm - Nope, ignore it!?
To clarify my 'product' is a page that uses the ccProduct engine. I now want to add extra information to that page. Does that make sense? In your words..
Are you trying to actually create a unique product that has its sole "home" on a product engine page? That's what subclassing ccProductForm would do
Yes :)
EDIT 2:
Following Tom's first suggestion (Apostrophe CMS: Engine Creation) I was able to extend the aPage table with my extra fields and the Engine is now saving these.
However, the standard aPageTable::getPagesInfo function isn't returning the fields I saved. I assume I'll have to select these separately?
EDIT 3:
aPageTable::retrieveBySlug() will do the job :)
REVISITED
I decided to revisit this and try Tom's second approach..
The other approach (if for whatever reason you don't want extra columns in aPage) is to keep your ccProduct table and fetch the relevant one
I managed to get this working, my ccProductEngine form constructor now looks like this..
class ccProductEngineForm extends ccProductForm
{
public function __construct($aPage = null, $options = array(), $CSRFSecret = null)
{
$page_id = $aPage->getId();
if ($page_id) {
$product = Doctrine_Core::getTable('ccProduct')->findOneByPage_id($page_id);
if ($product) {
$ccProduct = $product;
} else {
$ccProduct = new ccProduct();
}
}
parent::__construct($ccProduct, $options, $CSRFSecret);
}
I hope this helps someone :)
The main thing to remember is that your engine settings form receives a page object as the first parameter to the constructor, and you need to associate whatever your data is with that page object. Usually the engine settings form is a subclass of aPageForm, but it does not have to be. All that is required is that you associate your product object(s) with the page object in some way. Depending on your goals you probably want a refClass that creates a one-to-many relationship between product engine pages and products, and a form for manipulating those relationships.
From your code it is difficult for me to guess what you really want to do. Are you trying to actually create a unique product that has its sole "home" on a product engine page? That's what subclassing ccProductForm would do. Or do you just want to select an existing product from the product table and associate it with each engine page? Or do you want to select one or more products and associate them with the engine page?
Stuffing things into the request object is definitely not the way to go (:
Please clarify and I can help you further.
Tom Boutell, Apostrophe senior developer
There are two approaches you could follow here.
One is to just extend the schema of aPage in your project level config/doctrine/schema.yml file:
aPage:
columns:
synopsis:
type: text
Now every aPage object has a synopsis column, which will be null by default, and your engine settings form can just manipulate that one column. Your engine form subclasses aPageForm. You don't need a constructor at all (the default one will suit you), and your configure() method is just:
$this->useFields(array('synopsis'));
Boom, you have a textarea for the synopsis that appears when the page type is set to this engine. You don't need a ccProduct table at all.
The other approach (if for whatever reason you don't want extra columns in aPage) is to keep your ccProduct table and fetch the relevant one. Your engine form class then does not subclass aPageForm, and your constructor has to use the page passed to it to fetch the related ccProduct object (using a Doctrine relation) or create a new one if there is none yet. This is not difficult, but so far it looks like you can keep it even simpler by just adding a column to aPage.
Related
so I am working on a web app when the users click on create on the list screen, it takes them to a page where they have to enter some information and then they click on "next" and it will take them to another gsp page where they have to enter data for two domains but none of the data are stored yet in the tables but when they click on "create" button, everything get stored in the database
I was looking for examples but couldnt find any.
I know how to call the record and edit it since all the domains or the tables share id number so I can use it to retrive data. but my problem is when I transfer from the first gsp screen to another I want to save the instance and then when the users click on create, data goes to the three tables
any idea how to do that? I am still beginner and trying to learn
thank you
It sounds kind confusing what you wanna do and I am not sure I completely understood. Because you want to change the whole page, and yet, not to lose those previous answers, right?. Is there a specific reason why you want to do this?
I believe you could sent all the information from the first gsp to a controller and save everything in the "session" (e.g session.name = params.name, session.age = params.age), redirect/render the other gsp and later on, you get the info back from the session plus the info that just came and save everything. This is probably not a very good solution, but this is the only way I figured this out.
:)
Just an idea, I haven't used it until now, but I will some day in the future to modify the dialog-flow in my current application...:
Wouldn't that be a good example for the webflow-plugin?
This is what command objects are used for. Any time you have a collection of data that you want to collect in a form and then "generate" multiple domain objects from, then this is the way.
The idea is to create a single class that has all the information that you want to collect on the form. You post the filled form data back to the controller save action which then validates that the data is complete using the command object constraints. Once you are happy with everything, you then use the data in the command object to create/update your domain objects.
We consider the use of command objects a Grails best practice. You can provide custom validation support in the command object that looks for and validates relationships in the data that are difficult to do with the domain objects. We often write factory methods in the command class that produce a new or updated domain object, making it very convenient for unit testing.
See the "Command Objects" section of the "Web Layer" in the manual for details. In Grails 2, command objects are classes with the #Validateable annotation and in Grails 3 they implement the Validateable trait. If you declare your command class as an inner class in the controller, then it is automatically validateable. We've found that we prefer to declare them in src/groovy rather than as inner classes because they are easier for someone unfamiliar with the code to find.
So amongst all of these answers you have your answer but in all honesty I think it is well beyond your own comprehension at this point.
Assuming you have this example as a form
http://code.runnable.com/UevQr3zfd_oaAAGn/jquery-ui-tabs
On tab 1 you have
Name
Age
On tab 2 you have
Address
Postcode
Then you have two domain class
Class User {
String name
String age
Address address
}
Class Address {
String address1
String postcode
}
So a user has name age and also binded to address, whilst address has address1 and postcode
now your controller action
def save(MyBean bean) {
Address address = new Address(bean.loadAddress()).save()
User user = new User()
def userMap = bean.loadUser()
user.age=userMap.age
user.name=userMap.name
//The above object that got saved first
user.addresss=address
user.save()
render "hopefully this should have saved it as expected"
}
In src/main/groovy/yourPackage/MyBean.groovy
package yourPackage
import grails.validation.Validateable
Class MyBean implements Validateable{
String name
String age
Address address
String address1
String postcode
//Now declare your constraints like your domainClass add validator where required to add additional verification/validation to your objects sent back
//This will return all the objects required as a map to save address domain class
protected Map loadAddress() {
Map results=[:]
results.with {
address1=address1
postcode=postcode
}
return results
}
//this will return the user object
protected Map loadUser() {
Map results=[:]
results.with {
name=name
age=age
}
}
}
Other fairly complex validation bean examples:
PhotosBean CustomerChatBean ScheduleBaseBean
Other points of reference:
As I say I think as a beginner this may take you a while to get your head around but hoping with what is provided it will become a lot clearer now
E2A
It is really complicated!! can I have two gsp screens instead of jquery tabs
That doesn't make much sense.
You can have two actions which one just passes params onto 2nd gsp ?
So
def TestController {
def index() {
render view: page1
}
//where page 1 is the first form and submits to action2
//action2 picks up parmas from page1
def action2() {
render view: page2, model:[params:params]
}
}
in page2.gsp you have
<g:form action="action3">
<g:hiddenField name="originalName" value="${params.originalValue}"/>
<g:hiddenField name="originalName2" value="${params.originalValue2}"/>
<g:hiddenField name="originalName3" value="${params.originalValue3}"/>
Then your actual form content
The problem with doing this this way, is does action2 need to verify params received from page1 ? if so it needs to either render original page or page2 depending.
Once submitted to page2 the hiddenFields can be tampered with by end user so what was validated may be invalid now. You will need some form of a way of revalidating all those again.
Using validation methods above you could just call the validate() functions or maybe build some md5 check of initial values vs what is now sent from page2.
Either way if you don't care about validation and just want to see it work then above is the simplest way.
can I have two gsp screens instead of jquery tabs
in page1 you can just do <g:include action="page2"> and include a 2nd gsp within first but in all honesty page 1 could have just contained both actions in 1 page. which is why it don't make sense
As per a question that I asked yesterday I was trying to find a way to dynamically create more text boxes and have those map to my view's model so upon post to the server it will grab all the dynamically(js) generated text boxes and post that to an object such as a List.
To give an example of this confusing question:
I have a textbox that is labeled "Primary Contact" and the ticket creator can enter the contacts name and phone number into this box. What I want to do essentially is, switch this to three text boxes. One for Name, Email and PhoneNumber instead of one box. Then I will create some javascript that will dynamically create three more boxes to add another contact to this List collection. Then when the user submits the form to modify or create the ticket it passes this collection inside the model to the controller. However with petapoco it is a little confusing. Let me show you the controller:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult ModifyTicket(Ticket model)
{
string userString = User.Identity.Name.Replace("ONHOLD\\", "");
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
model.CreatedDate = DateTime.Now;
model.LastUpdateBy = Util.GetEmployeeIdByName(userString);
model.LastUpdate = DateTime.Now;
model.IsComplete = false;
model.ClientString = Util.GetClientNameById(model.ClientId);
model.LocationString = Util.GetLocationNameById(model.LocationId);
model.Update();
SuccessMessage = "You have successfully updated ticket number: " + model.TicketId + " for the following client: " + model.ClientString + ".";
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
ErrorMessage = "Woops! Something went wrong, please check back in a few moments, if the problem persists please contact development.";
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
The simple answer to this would be that my database model would contain a List object for this exact reason. However, I am using PetaPoco and I'm not entirely sure how it would be done. I could manually add in a collection to my Database model but when I regenerate my model based on any database schema changes I will lose any changes I've made to the file.
I am also using a partial class that my view uses for validation using DataAnnotations. However this class is identical to the database model it just contains DataAnnotations to provide client-side validation.
If anyone understands what I'm trying to accomplish I would be more than happyto provide more information to clarify any missing pieces. I just need a resolution to this as I can't find a solid way to go about resolving this issue!
Not entirely sure what you mean but it's easy to model bind from/to a list with MVC as you may already know. As for saving a deep object like this I'd use the [Ignore] attribute on the Ticket.List so it isn't persisted and handle it separately. I'd load the Contacts in separately from the Ticket object then manually add them to the Ticket object, alternatively use a join query and try the one-to-many approach to load it all in one go.
I think you're expecting Petapoco to update all in one? This won't happen you'll need to break it up. Hard to say from what you've written so far. There won't be a long list of contacts (from the sounds of it) so just insert or update them one by one.
Well that might help, or might not.
I have a Person class with two properties: name and address. I want to build a GSP page which allows for 10 users to be created at one time. This is how I'm implementing it and was wondering if there is a better way:
First, make 20 text boxes in the GSP page - 10 with someperson.name and 10 with someperson.address field names (make these in a loop or code them all individually, doesn't matter).
Second, process the submitted data in the controller. The someperson object has the submitted data, but in a not-so-nice structure ([name: ['Bob', 'John'], address: ['Address 1', 'Address 2']]), so I call transpose() on this to be able to access name, address pairs.
Then, build a list of Person objects using the pairs obtained from the previous step and validate/save them.
Finally, if validation fails (name cannot be null) then do something... don't know what yet! I'm thinking of passing the collection of Person objects to the GSP where they are iterated using a loop and if hasErrors then show them... Don't know how to highlight the fields which failed validation...
So, is there a better way (I should probably ask WHAT IS the better way)?
You should use Grails' data-binding support by declaring a command object like this
class PersonCommand {
List<Person> people = []
}
If you construct your form so that the request parameters are named like this:
person[0].name=bob
person[0].address=england
person[1].name=john
person[1].address=ireland
The data will be automatically bound to the personCommand argument of this controller action
class MyController {
def savePeople = {PersonCommand personCommand->
}
}
If you call personCommand.validate() it might in turn call validate() on each Person in people (I'm not sure). If it doesn't you can do this yourself by calling
boolean allPersonsValid = personCommand.people.every {it.validate()}
At this point you'll know whether all Person instances are valid. If they are not, you should pass the PersonCommand back to the GSP and you can use the Grails tags:
<g:eachError>
<g:hasErrors>
<g:renderErrors>
to highlight the fields in errors. If you're not exactly sure how to use these tags to do the highlight, I suggest you run grails generate-all for a domain class and look at the GSP code it generates.
Let me explain the whole context:
I'm using ASP.NET MVC 2, EF4 (POCO).
I trying to do a generic repository for my app.
I'm having problem on updating a many to many relationship.
I have an item that is related to other by a many to many table. In the View, the user picks the desired Categories, and send just the chosen id's to the Controller.
Then, the Controller queries the Category Repository, adding it to the main item:
item.Categories.Add(CategoriesRepository.Single(id);
But, when I go the Repository and try to save like this:
Entities.ApplyCurrentValues(entity);
Context.SaveChanges();
But, the state of my entity is Added.
Then, I Cannot save my entity :(.
How can I solve this problem?
Thanks for your answers.
I have in the View, the following code:
<%= Html.CheckBoxList("Categories", ((IEnumerable<Categories>)ViewData["Categories"]).ToDictionary(c => c.ID.ToString(), c => c.Name)
, Model.Categories.ToDictionary(c => c.ID.ToString(),c => c.Name )) %>
Where CheckBoxList is a HTMLHelper.
Im putting the ids as values in the View, because I dont know other way to put and then get this information from the View.
How can I use the ObjectStateManager.ChangeRelationshipState method?
Like this? :
itemRepository.Db.ObjectStateManager.ChangeRelationshipState(item, item.Categories, "Categories", System.Data.EntityState.Modified);
I trying in this way, but it returns error.
Help! lol
You've got a few problems.
1) ApplyCurrentValues only works for scalar-properties. Since your trying to add a Category to the Categories navigational property on Item, this will not work.
2) You say this:
the user picks the desired Categories, and send just the chosen id's to the Controller.
How can your Controller accept a bunch of id's? How is this model binding done? We need more info on how your View is bound to your model, what's being passed to the action method. But it sounds like you need to redesign this particular View with the help of a ViewModel.
3) Change tracking with POCO's in MVC is a royal pain in the butt. In your scenario, you'll need to use ObjectStateManager.ChangeRelationshipState to manually set the Categories relationship to **Modified.
Honesty though, it's more pain than it's worth. I went through this same problem.
Cop it on the chin - go grab the entity first and use Controller.UpdateModel:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Item(Item item)
{
// get the existing item
var existingItem = ItemRepository.Single(item.Id);
// use MVC to update the model, including navigational properties
UpdateModel(existingItem);
// save changes.
Context.SaveChanges();
}
I am using Symfony 1.2.9 (with Propel ORM) to create a website. I have started using the admin generator to implement the admin functionality. I am having all manner of problems getting the admin manager to display an object (blog) that has one 1:N relation (blogposts) and one N:M relationship (blogroll).
This is proving to be far more difficult than I had ever imagined (and I daresay, than it needs to be). I have already spent two days on this problem and have not made much progress. I am trying to generate admin functionality for a blog.
I have posted an abridged version of my schema here. Hopefully it will help clarify the problem I am having (maybe I am not explaining the problem clearly enough - but hopefully, the schema should clarify the problem I am facing, and what I'm trying to do).
A blog has 0 to 1 blog rolls, 0 to N blog posts attached to it. Each blog post has 0 to M comments attached to it. Currently, I can view a list of blogs. But I want to add 2 interactions (or links) that can make me:
view the blogroll (which is a list of blogs attached to the blog)
view the list of blogposts attached to a blog.
When a blogpost list is shown, I want link to show a link (same functionality as before), that allows me to show the list of comments for the selected blogpost.
I am sure I am not the first (or only) person that has tried to do this before. Am I going about it the wrong way, is there a better (i.e. more intuitie for the user) way of displaying and performing CRUD on objects with such relationships?. Can anyone out there help?
Why don't you do it as you have proposed by yourself in your other question.
(This is again for Doctrine but for Propel it should be similar).
Create an object action in your generator.yml:
list:
object_actions:
bloglist: {label: Bloglist}
Then in your actions.class.php you have to add a function:
public function executeListBloglist(sfWebRequest $request) {
$blog = $this->getRoute()->getObject();
// retrieve the blogposts via a PEER method (I don't have any clue about Propel ;))
$this->blogposts = however.you.get.the.blogposts();
}
Then create a template bloglistSuccess.php where you show the posts.
Or, you can redirect or forward to the admin module for the blogposts if you have such a module. There you have probably to override the list action to accept the ID parameter of the blog and extend the query to filter posts by this blog id.
There is nothing wrong in doing a redirect or forward, it is not a hack ;)
Edit after comment:
I would also suggest that you forward the request.
No you don't have to change the routing you can just append the parameter like you suggested.
For overriding I reconsidered that it would be better if you override the buildQuery method (again). (I can't remember how this method was called with Propel, I hope you get what I mean).
So it would look like this:
class blogpostAdminActions extends autoBlogpostAdminActions
{
//...
protected function buildQuery()
{
$query = parent::buildQuery();
$request = $this->getRequest(); // <- I am not sure about this method call but there is one that gives you the webRequest.
if ($request->hasParamter('blog_id'))
{
$query->andWhere('blog_id = ?', $request->getParameter('blog_id'));
}
return $query;
}
}
Of course you have to change this to Propel criteria, but I assume you can do that ;)
Hope this helps you.