Re: gda config component

On mer, 19 avr 2000, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > Good idea, but, instead of having one component (process) for each of
> > 
> > I did not mean to have separate processes for each component but one config
> > process per provider which serves several different simple components, plus one
> > more complex component which is the global config component.
> > 
> Oh right, now I understand. I had thought about it very quick. In fact,
> it's fine to have several components in the same process.
> > > the 'profiles', why not have some kind of property where you can specify
> > > which data to be shown? This can be easily done with bonobo properties,
> > > which can be attached to the config controls.
> > 
> > Yes! So as I see it each provider will have a config process which will offer
> > several small components accessible individually (such as f.e. management of
> > users) with almost no properties (to be defined for each component), and one
> > big global config component where there will be several properties (maybe
> > boolean properties to show/hide parts) to specify exactly what the config
> > component should display (so if for example I want to manage users, I can get
> > the 'user list' component, the 'groups list' component and 'users
> > capabilities'). Is that possible? What do you think of this?
> > 
> yes, having one bonoboControl for each of the config profiles should do
> it. For the 'big' component, this should implement a BonoboContainer, as
> the gda-mgr application does.

Why? The 'big' component can be considered as a simple control component, no?



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]