Re: [ptp-dev] Question about AbstractRemoteResourceManagerConfigurationW

["Randy M. Roberts" <rsqrd@xxxxxxxx>]

Dave, Greg,

I'm glad to see that the multiple pages functionality came
in handy!

R^2

On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 14:38 -0400, Greg Watson wrote:
> Ok, that sounds great. I'm always happy not to have to do any  
> additional work. :-)
> 
> Greg
> 
> On Aug 27, 2007, at 12:04 PM, Dave Wootton wrote:
> 
> > Greg
> > I don't think I need an extension point to do this.  I have a class,
> > PEResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPageFactory which is a clone of
> > ORTEResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPageFactory. There's a  
> > getPages()
> > method in this class which returns an array of  
> > RMConfigurationWizardPage
> > objects. If I change the implementation of this method to create an  
> > array
> > with two objects, the first being an instance of
> > PEResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPage and the second my new  
> > wizard page
> > class, then when I go thru the wizard, I see the two pages in  
> > order. I've
> > started coding my second wizard page and it so far it looks like this
> > works. There's code somewhere in  a superclass that seems to  
> > iterate thru
> > this array displaying pages in the proper order.
> >
> > If this is a reasonable way to implement this, then I don't think I  
> > need
> > any modifications to other PTP code.
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent by: ptp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > 08/27/2007 11:37 AM
> > Please respond to
> > Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> > To
> > Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > Re: [ptp-dev] Question about
> > AbstractRemoteResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPage.createContents
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > So to get this straight, the idea would be to provide an extension
> > point that would let you specify your own page. The page display
> > order would be:
> >
> > Choose RM Type -> Proxy Configuration -> RM specific page (if
> > present) -> RM Name & Description
> >
> > Does that sound ok?
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2007, at 10:56 AM, Dave Wootton wrote:
> >
> >> Greg
> >> I'm looking at the wizard panels again, and it looks like it may
> >> not make
> >> sense to extend the AbstractRemoteManagerConfigurationWizardPage  
> >> class
> >> since I think this means that we need to duplicate the GUI logic to
> >> manage
> >> all the widgets related to proxy setup and remote access in that
> >> class as
> >> well as adding our additional options for proxy invocation.
> >>
> >> I'm thinking that we would just use that class directly, then
> >> implement a
> >> second proxy setup page, extending from RMConfigurationWizardPage
> >> where we
> >> would implement the logic to manage our proxy invocation options.
> >> This way
> >> we don't have problems staying in sync with
> >> AbstractRemoteManagerConfigurationWizardPage. It looks like the proxy
> >> configuration wizard is already set up to support this concept by the
> >> creation of an array with two elements, the
> >> AbstractRemoteManagerConfigurationWizardPage class followed by the  
> >> new
> >> wizard page in
> >> PEResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPageFactory.getPages().
> >>
> >> Does this make sense?
> >>
> >> I guess the other alternative would be to create a pane in the
> >> createContents() method of
> >> AbstractRemoteManagerConfigurationWizardPage
> >> that we can access and create our additional widgets in that pane.
> >> Dave
> >> ----- Forwarded by Dave Wootton/Poughkeepsie/IBM on 08/27/2007
> >> 10:37 AM
> >> -----
> >>
> >> Dave Wootton/Poughkeepsie/IBM
> >> 08/08/2007 11:54 AM
> >>
> >> To
> >> Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> cc
> >>
> >> Subject
> >> Re: [ptp-dev] Question about
> >> AbstractRemoteResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPage.createContents
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Greg
> >> Rolf and I talked about this and think our extending this class to
> >> add the
> >> widgets for resource manager-unique options would be reasonable. I
> >> think
> >> this means defining some key we can use to store the options tring
> >> as well
> >> as a way to get/set it.
> >> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent by: ptp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> 08/07/2007 01:06 PM
> >> Please respond to
> >> Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >>
> >> To
> >> Parallel Tools Platform general developers <ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> cc
> >>
> >> Subject
> >> Re: [ptp-dev] Question about
> >> AbstractRemoteResourceManagerConfigurationWizardPage.createContents
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I was just going to change that to 'Launch server manually'. :-)
> >>
> >> I didn't have any particular solution in mind. If you'd like to be
> >> able to override the default implementation to provide your own
> >> wizard page then that would probably be easiest for me. It could get
> >> a bit messy trying to provide enough flexibility on the current page
> >> for every implementation.
> >>
> >> Greg
> >>
> >> On Aug 7, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Dave Wootton wrote:
> >>
> >>> When the second page of the resource wizard appears, there is text
> >>> at the
> >>> bottom of the page next to a checkbox stating Launch ORTE server
> >>> manually,
> >>> where ORTE should be able to be replaced by PE, LoadLeveler, etc.
> >>> We could
> >>> implement our own wizard page extending this class to fix this, but
> >>> that
> >>> seems like the wrong thing to do to fix a message string. However,
> >>> we have
> >>> had some discussion about additional fields on this page for  
> >>> resource
> >>> manager invocation options, such as run mode for the proxy (PE
> >>> with or
> >>> without LoadLeveler), turning on an internal proxy trace, etc.
> >>> Is the intent to provide a generic wizard creation page that  
> >>> includes
> >>> fields for proxy options, or would we be expected to provide our own
> >>> implementation, which might be a little more user-friendly since we
> >>> could
> >>> provide more appropriate widgets for specifying the options.
> >>>
> >>> Either way is fine, we just don't want to have more unique panels
> >>> than we
> >>> really need.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Dave
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> ptp-dev mailing list
> >>> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ptp-dev mailing list
> >> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ptp-dev mailing list
> >> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ptp-dev mailing list
> > ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ptp-dev mailing list
> > ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ptp-dev mailing list
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev