Personal tools
You are here: Home Products Plone Roadmap #184: Include more/improved portlets
Document Actions

#184: Include more/improved portlets

Contents
  1. Definitions
  2. Motivation
  3. Assumptions
  4. Proposal
  5. Implementation
  6. Deliverables
  7. Risks
  8. Progress log
  9. Participants
by Jon Stahl last modified March 2, 2008 - 13:46
Plone 3.1 should include a few more "out of the box" portlets.
Proposed by
Jon Stahl
Proposal type
User interface
Assigned to release
State
completed

Definitions

 

Motivation

Plone 3's new portlets' infrastructure pushes a fantastic degree of control to site managers.

There are a couple of key portlets that really oughta ship "out of the box" to cover common use-cases, and to ensure that Plone offers a smooth 'entry ramp' to new site admins.  This PLIP aims to collect them.

Assumptions

 

Proposal

Portlets that should be written for Plone 3.1 include:

  • A "static content" portlet, which allows users to put arbitrary HTML content into a portlet.
  • A generic "Collection" portlet that can display the results of a Collection (Smart Folder) in a portlet.  This will need careful attention to configurability to avoid user frustration.
  • An RSS portlet that works for anonymous users, and allows for the display of multiple feeds.

Please feel free to edit this PLIP to add additional good ideas.

Implementation

  • plone.portlet.static has a branch aimed at Plone 3.1, which depends on the PLIP 200 branch of plone.app.form to gain a Kupu widget. This is largely complete.
  • plone.portlet.collection has a branch aimed at Plone 3.1. Again, this is largely complete. However, a better caching strategy should be considered either pre- or post-merge.

These are both standalone products. Merging them will involve putting them into the various bundles and installer sources, adding an <include /> statement to Plone's configure.zcml to alleviate the need for a ZCML slug, and running their GenericSetup profiles on installation.

Alternatively, the portlets could be merged into the plone.app.portlets package, but there is no overwhelmingly compelling reason to do so.

Deliverables

 

Risks

 

Progress log

  • Static text portlet (plone.portlet.static) largely complete
  • Collection portlet (plone.portlet.collection) largely complete, but requires a proper caching strategy
  • Wichert has implemented collective.portlet.feedmixer, which provides a nice replacement for CMFSin's RSS aggregation capabilities. This needs to be investigated to determine whether it is ready for Plone 3.1

Participants

 

Framework team vote

Posted by Martijn Pieters at December 13, 2007 - 22:10
+1, with the qualifier that I'd like the PLIP to be locked down to the
3 portlets listed there now, and that, as Martin noted, the static
portlet will use the kupu formlib widget from PLIP 200.

Framework team vote

Posted by Andreas Zeidler at December 13, 2007 - 23:03
+1 (see http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/framework-team/2007-December/001484.html)

Framework team vote

Posted by Tom Lazar at December 14, 2007 - 21:28
+1 seconding martijn's limit to the three portlets and #220

Framework team vote

Posted by Raphael Ritz at December 20, 2007 - 08:07
+1 under the restrictions pointed out above.

Framework team vote

Posted by Danny Bloemendaal at December 22, 2007 - 16:11
+1

More flexibility to the calendar portlet

Posted by Gilles Lenfant at December 27, 2007 - 15:19
Configuration of each calendar portlet should include :

* The start folder-ish for searching events (default to the Plone root)
* Selection of Event-ish content types (implementing IEvent ?)
* Title of the calendar portlet ("Meetings", "Conferences", ...)

These 3 Portlets Definitely Needed

Posted by Rose Pruyne at April 4, 2008 - 18:12
Of these three, the most critical is the collection portlet, imho. All three would be a *most* welcome addition.

For any issues with the web site functionality, please file a ticket.

Please consult the policy on plone.org content if you want your content published on this site.

Servers and hosting by