[Framework-Team] Comments on PLIP 244

Ricardo Alves rsa at eurotux.com
Tue Oct 28 19:06:26 UTC 2008

Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Ricardo Alves wrote:
>> Hi framework team,
>> I'm sorry I didnt' comment on the previous discussion about PLIP #244, 
>> but I wasn't subscribing this list. Anyway, I'd like to comment on some 
>> of the objections already posted in the PLIP page.
>> About the usefulness of site-wide portlets, let me give an example: you 
>> have a static portlet assignment at a folder, and that portlet makes 
>> sense only in the context of that folder, so you want to block it in 
>> subfolders but keeping site-wide portlets visible (e.g. like news, 
>> review list, events, etc). Currently you can't do this, unless you 
>> manage to setup some weird combination using the other categories...
> I disagree. Again you are just describing a special case of a more
> generic problem: the lack of ability to selective block (and perhaps
> unblock) portlets. 

I agree that per-portlet blocking would make it easier, and it shouldn't 
be that hard to implement.

> I can not think of a single situation where site
> portlets would make sense.

The use case is almost the same, even with per-portlet blocking. I'll 
try to describe it.

Say you have the following site structure:

/ (Site Root)
/services (Folder)
/services/network/ (Folder)

- the site root has a portlet assignment (e.g. news portlet)

- the folder "/services" blocks the news portlet

- but you don't want to block the news portlet in folder "/services/network"

- if using a site-wide portlet, folder "/services" would be the only one 
blocking it and it would be shown in "/services/network".

Anyway, I do agree that this use case is not that common, and 
per-portlet blocking would do the trick for most use cases. So I guess 
the best is to start working on it :)


Ricardo Alves <rsa at eurotux.com>
Eurotux <http://www.eurotux.com> 

More information about the Framework-Team mailing list