Apache Click and Portlets

[Muhammad Sarwar <m....@nesc.gla.ac.uk>]

Hi,

Just recently discovered about Apache Click and the way it has been projected, sounds promising. Well, i have a question: How to program JSR168/268 compliant portlets in Apache Click? And how to integrate the solution in some of the leading portal frameworks like Liferay, for example? Any code examples?

Thanks,

Sulman

Re: Apache Click and Portlets

[Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>]

Hi Muhammad,

If you interested in portlet development type you maybe interested looking
at one of the projects from Apache Portal: http://portals.apache.org

Hope this helps.

Thanks,

Henry

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:21 AM, Joseph Schmidt
<jo...@yahoo.com>wrote:

> I don't consider myself a fan of Portals, but to be fair, there are more
>> to Portals than just the portlet pages. The Portal provides a one-stop
>> administration for the entire application which can consist of multiple
>> Portlets / Applications. You also get single sign-on for all Portlets
>> hosted on the Portal and most Portals ship with a plethora of enterprisy
>> applications.
>>
> The user can see only the "portlet pages".
> However, the Ajax/CMS based solutions also have SSO and nice configuration
> of those portlets like "boxes". It's just that most of the serverside
> solutions are PHP based.
>
>
>  Its a shame the Portal spec deviated so much from the Servlet spec.
>> Servlet based frameworks have to jump quite a few hoops to comply with
>> the Portlet spec.
>>
> Yes it is. I haven't seen any portlet implementation that is fast - because
> the requirements ask
> too much from the server. If a portal was fast, it was not using the
> portlet specification.
>
> So I believe that the best way to have what the users want "portlet pages",
> si not to use the portlet specification, but the CMS+Ajax like approach -
> since this is the only fast solution so far.
>
> Joseph.
>
>

Re: Apache Click and Portlets

[Joseph Schmidt <jo...@yahoo.com>]

> I don't consider myself a fan of Portals, but to be fair, there are more
> to Portals than just the portlet pages. The Portal provides a one-stop
> administration for the entire application which can consist of multiple
> Portlets / Applications. You also get single sign-on for all Portlets
> hosted on the Portal and most Portals ship with a plethora of enterprisy
> applications.
The user can see only the "portlet pages".
However, the Ajax/CMS based solutions also have SSO and nice 
configuration of those portlets like "boxes". It's just that most of the 
serverside solutions are PHP based.

> Its a shame the Portal spec deviated so much from the Servlet spec.
> Servlet based frameworks have to jump quite a few hoops to comply with
> the Portlet spec.
Yes it is. I haven't seen any portlet implementation that is fast - 
because the requirements ask
too much from the server. If a portal was fast, it was not using the 
portlet specification.

So I believe that the best way to have what the users want "portlet 
pages", si not to use the portlet specification, but the CMS+Ajax like 
approach - since this is the only fast solution so far.

Joseph.

Re: Apache Click and Portlets

[Bob Schellink <sa...@gmail.com>]

I don't consider myself a fan of Portals, but to be fair, there are more to Portals than just the 
portlet pages. The Portal provides a one-stop administration for the entire application which can 
consist of multiple Portlets / Applications. You also get single sign-on for all Portlets hosted on 
the Portal and most Portals ship with a plethora of enterprisy applications.

Its a shame the Portal spec deviated so much from the Servlet spec. Servlet based frameworks have to 
jump quite a few hoops to comply with the Portlet spec.

kind regards

bob


On 23/02/2010 08:08 PM, Joseph Schmidt wrote:
>> The only advice I can provide for portlet integration is to IFRAME
>> Click content inside a portlet.
> Many popular sites that look like portals, use in fact Ajax to load the
> different boxes, so they aren't really "portlets". The end-user can't
> see this, nor does he knows the difference.
>
> I believe that even most major Javascript frameworks have plug-ins to
> easily create this "portlet-like" UIs.
>
> Joseph.
>
>

Re: Apache Click and Portlets

[Joseph Schmidt <jo...@yahoo.com>]

> The only advice I can provide for portlet integration is to IFRAME
> Click content inside a portlet.
Many popular sites that look like portals, use in fact Ajax to load the 
different boxes, so they aren't really "portlets". The end-user can't 
see this, nor does he knows the difference.

I believe that even most major Javascript frameworks have plug-ins to 
easily create this "portlet-like" UIs.

Joseph.

Re: Apache Click and Portlets

[Malcolm Edgar <ma...@gmail.com>]

Hi Muhammad,

Apache Click does not support portlets (JSR 168), Click uses a
completely different programming and event model.  There is not
intention to support the portlet specification in the future.

The only advice I can provide for portlet integration is to IFRAME
Click content inside a portlet.

regards Malcolm Edgar

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Muhammad Sarwar
<m....@nesc.gla.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just recently discovered about Apache Click and the way it has been
> projected, sounds promising. Well, i have a question: How to program
> JSR168/268 compliant portlets in Apache Click? And how to integrate the
> solution in some of the leading portal frameworks like Liferay, for example?
> Any code examples?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sulman