Pluto driver page config

[Pawel Kozlowski <pk...@amadeus.com>]

Hi,

First of all, I would like to thank you all for all the effort put into 
developing Pluto and Pluto driver. The code is so simple for such a 
functionality!

This simplicity and small code base attracted me recently to Pluto+driver 
as a possible "simple portal implementation". I don't need a full-blown 
portal framework - but only the ability to run several MVC controllers on 
one page (actually - several web flow per one page) alongside with portlet 
windows state management (minimized, normal etc.). It looks like 
pluto+driver could be a solution.

Recently I was going through the driver code base and I wonder why 
PageConfig holds only portlets IDs, instead of an other, more elaborate 
object (PortletWindow???). It looks like this would allow more flexible 
and clean implementation of the rendering part.

I know that you main focus is on the container itself, especially now, 
with JSR-286 looming ahead, but I really believe that the current 
implementation of the driver could be a little bit more complete and 
flexible, without compromising the simplicity. For sure I'll play with 
driver a lot more, but if you could tell me if there was any particular 
issue that led to putting only portlet id on the portal page?

Best regards,
Pawel Kozlowski

Re: Pluto driver page config

[Eric Chow <er...@gmail.com>]

Try PutoWeb, http://putoweb.dev.java.net.

This framework depends on Pluto-1.1.

Eric


On 9/12/06, Pawel Kozlowski <pk...@amadeus.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> First of all, I would like to thank you all for all the effort put into
> developing Pluto and Pluto driver. The code is so simple for such a
> functionality!
>
> This simplicity and small code base attracted me recently to Pluto+driver as
> a possible "simple portal implementation". I don't need a full-blown portal
> framework - but only the ability to run several MVC controllers on one page
> (actually - several web flow per one page) alongside with portlet windows
> state management (minimized, normal etc.). It looks like pluto+driver could
> be a solution.
>
> Recently I was going through the driver code base and I wonder why
> PageConfig holds only portlets IDs, instead of an other, more elaborate
> object (PortletWindow???). It looks like this would allow more flexible and
> clean implementation of the rendering part.
>
> I know that you main focus is on the container itself, especially now, with
> JSR-286 looming ahead, but I really believe that the current implementation
> of the driver could be a little bit more complete and flexible, without
> compromising the simplicity. For sure I'll play with driver a lot more, but
> if you could tell me if there was any particular issue that led to putting
> only portlet id on the portal page?
>
> Best regards,
> Pawel Kozlowski