Plovr Enhancement Request : add a context in the server generated URLs (http://localhost:9080/MY_CONTEXT/input/...)

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hello,
I' like to propose a new config field such as "context" to be able to get RAW 
inputs <script> with a contextual URL.

Instead of receiving this:
"http://localhost:9000/input/hello/closure/goog/debug/error.js"

It would generate:
"http://localhost:9000/MY_CONTEXT/input/hello/closure/goog/debug/error.js"

the config would have a new field:
{
  "id": "hello",
...
  "context" : "MY_CONTEXT"
}

Ths code generating the "http://localhost:9080/input" is there:

InputFileHandler.createInputNameToUriConverter(...) {
   final String moduleUriBase = server.getServerForExchange(exchange);
...
   return String.format("%sinput/%s%s",
            moduleUriBase,
            QueryData.encode(configId),
            name);
}

CompilationServer.getServerForExchange(HttpExchange exchange) {
...
    return String.format("%s://%s:%d/", scheme, host, this.port);
}

could become something like :
    return String.format("%s://%s:%d/%s/", scheme, host, this.port, this.context);

But the config is a bit more strict so it would require a new config field and 
I prefer asking you before proposing any stupid patch!

Do you think it could be possible?

For info, I'm working on a googleclosure+plovr module for Java web framework 
Play! 
I wrote a first very simple module integrating automatic Closure SOY compiling 
(http://code.google.com/p/mandubian-play-google-closure/)
Then, Dallan Quass integrated Plovr on his side and, very kindly, contributed 
his code to my project.
I'm just trying to finalize/package it in the "play! philosophy" and bring more 
features from Plovr.

Best Regards
Pascal Voitot

Original issue reported on code.google.com by pascal.v...@gmail.com on 31 Jan 2011 at 8:14

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi Pascal, unfortunately I'm not that familiar with Play! so I don't completely 
understand the motivation behind this change. It seems potentially problematic 
to me because the plovr server intends to be RESTful where the first part after 
the path is always the command:

/input
/compile
/modules

etc.

It seems like your change would break this pattern. In particular, it would be 
harder to look at a plovr URL and be able to immediately tell what it does.

What is it about Play! that necessitates this change?

Thanks,
Michael

Original comment by bolinf...@gmail.com on 1 Feb 2011 at 4:48

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Basically, we want to "bridge" plovr through Play! in order to mix fast web 
development tools brought by Play in Java and the power of google closure 
tools. 
I wrote a first simple module for Play+GoogleClosure just doing SOY "on the 
fly" compiling. It allowed using just simple closure templating in a very 
quick&iterative way.
Then, Dallan proposed to integrate plovr in this Play! module and provided the 
first implementation. It allows to get plovr content through play and manages 
several plovr configurations depending on whether you are in a dev or a prod 
environment.

So in our Play integration, plovr is not a standalone server, it is used as a 
library and we use it as a "closure content enabler for Play".

Thus, as plovr is not a "frontend", I just want people to be able to use any 
trivial and generic url such as "/input/" or "/compile/" or "/modules/" in 
their play application while using plovr in parallel.
It could be as simple as just adding "/plovr/" before "/input/"
http://localhost:9080/input/hello/... would become 
http://localhost:9080/plovr/input/hello/...
But as I don't people from using traditional "localhost:9080/input", I propose 
to add a new configuration to enable it or not.
In my case, it would be a simple way to be sure that plovr routes are not 
overriden by anything else.

OK this is a detail and if you tell me that adding a context is far too 
complicated, I will add a "WARNING: do not use /input, /compile etc..." in the 
documentation :)

Thanks for your time!

regards
Pascal

Original comment by pascal.v...@gmail.com on 1 Feb 2011 at 8:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Would it be much work for you to change your Play! plugin to take requests to:

http://localhost:9080/plovr/*

and then rewrite the URL and pass it to the version of plovr that you have 
bundled as a library and then return the result?

That would not require any changes to plovr.

Original comment by bolinf...@gmail.com on 1 Feb 2011 at 4:22

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yes I can do that, this is my last solution, the dumb one :)
In fact, the only problem are the embedded "/input/" scripts loaded from client 
JS in RAW mode. I should rewrite everything with /input/ on the fly but this is 
not quite a problem.
I can do that if you prefer keeping plovr as it is. I can understand that. 
That was just a suggestion of enhancement, not a critical issue.

Anyway, I think plovr+closure+play might be interesting at the end!

regards
Pascal

Original comment by pascal.v...@gmail.com on 1 Feb 2011 at 4:35

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have actually started using Play! now myself, and it's quite fun! But to 
close the loop on this, for now, I do not plan to support this feature right 
now. The space of plovr options is already getting to be quite large, and I 
want to focus on ones for which there is no workaround.

Cheers,
Michael

Original comment by bolinf...@gmail.com on 24 Apr 2011 at 2:35

• Changed state: WontFix

[GoogleCodeExporter]

No problem... I haven't worked much on the play closure plugin recently because 
I'm working on other opensource projects right now. If you need any advise or 
discuss some points about Play!, don't hesitate, I contribute a lot to Play! 
community so I begin to have some knowledge about it ;)

regards
Pascal

Original comment by pascal.v...@gmail.com on 24 Apr 2011 at 2:44