I have a large codebase that I am trying to eventually convert to Zend-Framework-powered stack.
I at times write new modules to where I have a choice:
keep writing using legacy routing/initialization/etc
somehow figure out how to use ZF for the new module only while the rest of the legacy code works "as before"
Is this possible?
How?
To give you an idea, code I have now uses proprietary multiple routing files, where everything in ZF goes through one single router file.
So legacy code is called like so i.e.:
http://legacy:80/index.php?route=product
May be similar to zend framework 2 in a subdirectory
Zend Middleware approach
I was able to follow https://docs.zendframework.com/zend-mvc/middleware/ and implement an IndexMiddleware class. I can see that IndexMiddleware::process() method is being called. But I am not certain how to go further, and how to engage my legacy web application to return data as before.
MiddlewareListener.
Legacy App - index.php
$module = filter($_GET['p']);
if (!empty($module))
$inc = 'portal/{$module}.php'; //prep a legacy module
require($inc); //run module
There are many solutions there... Depends on how much new code you have, and addresses you want.
Long story short, you could work at the server level (aliases, rewrite, etc), or at the PHP code level.
Something you could do is use the index.php from the Zend Skeleton for instance, and the default url routing through index.php. Then look at the application lifecycle, especially the route event. I believe that's a good point to add a listener that would dispatch the old application. You can find numbers of Listeners in the Zend MVC code to base your code on (look at the middleware one for instance).
Related
We have an old Yii application along with new Symfony one.
The basic idea is simple - I need to check if there is a route matching in Symfony application then it is cool, if not then bootstrap Yii application and try to handle the request with it.
The main idea to not instantiate AppKernel (and do not load autoload.php - since there is two different autoload.php for each project) before I am sure there is route matching.
Can I do it somehow?
We've done this before with legacy applications.
There are two approaches you can take.
Wrap your old application inside a symfony project (recommended).
Unfortunately this will indeed load the symfony front-controller and kernel. No way around that. You need to make sure that symfony can't handle the request and to do that the kernel needs to be booted up.
Use sub-directories and apache virtual hosts to load one application vs the other as needed.
Given option 1,
You can either create your own front controller that loads either symfony or yii by reading routes (from static files if using yml or xml, or annotations which will be more complex) OR EventListener (RequestListener) that listens to the HttpKernelInterface::MASTER_REQUEST and ensures that a route can be returned.
Creating your own front controller is the only way that you can make it not load the symfony kernel, but it will require you to write something that understands the routes in both frameworks (or at least symfony's) and hands off the request appropriately.
Event listener example:
public function onkernelRequest(GetResponseEvent $event)
{
if (HttpKernelInterface::MASTER_REQUEST !== $event->getRequestType()) {
return;
}
... Code to continue normally, or bootstrap yii and return a custom response... (Can include and ob_start, or make an http request, etc)
}
public function getSubscribedEvents()
{
return [
KernelEvents::REQUEST => ['onKernelRequest']
];
}
As you see, the kernel needs to be booted to ensure symfony can't serve the route. Unless creating your own front controller (as stated above).
A third approach would be to create a fallback controller, which would load up a specified URL if no route was found within symfony. Although this approach is generally used for legacy projects that lack a framework and use page scripts instead of proper routes, and definitely requires the use/help of output buffering.
The EventListener approach gives you the opportunity to create a proper Request to hand off to yii, and using what is returned to create a Response as proper symfony object (can also use ob or other options).
Thank you.
This is an alternative to vpassapera's solution -http://stovepipe.systems/post/migrating-your-project-to-symfony
I'm building an express app in express 4.0 (rc3), since I'm starting from scratch and in development for a while, but if there's a way to do this in 3.0, that'd be welcome too.
What I want is a set of comment REST routes that I can attach to other routes in my API. So:
/posts/:postID/comments/:commentID
/profiles/:profileID/comments/:commentID
The way I was doing it was to encapsulate the comment routes into a module, including a buildRoutes(router) function in the module.
Then I can do app.use('/api/comments', commentController.buildRoutes(express.Router())) in my main server definition, and then in my profile module's buildRoutes(router), I can do
buildRoutes = function(profileRouter)
.... build the basic CRUD routes ...
profileRouter.get('/:profileID', show)
profileRouter.use('/:profileID', commentController.buildRoutes(express.Router()))
It seems like only the .VERB methods actually replace :wildcards in the route, and not the .use one. I could always muddle through with a piece of custom middleware that goes on a /api/profiles/* and maps the appropriate URL parameters into req.fields, but I want to make sure that this is actually required.
So this wasn't particularly easy to do the way I originally intended. However, I just avoided the entire problem by reframing my buildRoutes method to accept a baseURL and a router argument. Instead of modularizing it completely, now I say, profileController.buildRoutes('/api/profiles/', router) which in turn calls commentController.buildRoutes('/api/profiles/:profileID/comments', router), and so on.
It's not terribly satisfying (I would rather encapsulate path/routing information and hide that from the controller) but it works.
My application has 2 purposes:
It needs to run stand-alone, where it needs routing for choosing a
study etc.
Or, it runs integrated in an other project, and only needs
one controller and one view.
Currently i have a routeProvider configured for the stand-alone application, injecting the pages in the ng-view tag in the HTML.
Now is my question: How can i inject an controller and view in the ng-view (For the integration). I cannot manipulate the HTML since it is static. I cant use a single routeProvider rule, because this can interfeir the application that integrates mine (Other plugins can use the #/.. for info or other things).
In your situation you can't use routeProvider when other stuff interferes.
Of Course you could prevent routeProvider to act on outside changes of the hashbang with workarounds but thats not nice.
routeProvider will listen to all changes of the url after the hashbang.
So what you should do is to manually bootstrap() your angular app with the controllers you need. If your app is small enough you could even use directives to achieve lazy loading of templates with the attribute templateUrl : "/myurl"
Usually to create a dynamic App use Routing. Simnple point.
The best way to use Angular if you want to unleash all its might don't integrate it.
I explain why:
+ Your state never gets lost due to page reloads
+ You have full control of the environment and don't have to worry about interfering scripts etc.
+ If your user should manually reload, you can redirect to home/login or even better use requireJS or HTML5 local storage to recover your scopes after a reload
Cheers, Heinrich
I'm working on something that needs to install files periodically into a folder in /Library.
I understand that in the past I could have used one of the Authenticate methods but those have since been deprecated in 10.7.
What I've understood from my reading so far:
I should create a helper that somehow gets authenticated and have that helper do all of the moving tasks. I've taken a look at some of the sample code, including some involving XPC and one called Elevator but I'm a bit confused.
A lot of it seems to deal with setting up some sort of client / server model but I'm not sure how this would translate into me actually installing my files into the correct directories. Most of the examples are just passing strings.
My question simply: How can I create my folder in /Library programmatically and periodically write files to it while only prompting the user for a password ONCE and never again? I'm really not sure how to approach this and there doesn't seem to be much documentation.
You are correct that there isn't much documentation for this. You'll basically write another app, the helper app, which will get installed with SMJobBless(). Not surprisingly,
the tricky part here is the code signing. The least obvious part for me was that the SMAuthorizedClients and SMPrivilegedExecutables entries in the info plist files of each app are dependent on the identity/certificate that you used to sign the app with. There is also a trick with the compiler/linker to getting the info plist file compiled into the helper tool, which will be a single executable file, rather than a bundle.
Once you get the helper app up and running then you have to devise a way to communicate with it since these are two different processes. XPC is one option, perhaps the easiest. XPC is typically used with server processes, but what you are using here is the communication side of XPC only. Basically it passes dictionaries back and forth between the two apps. Create a standard format for the dictionary. I used #"action", #"source", and #"destination" with 3 different action values, #"filemove", #"filecopy", and #"makedirectory". Those are the 3 things that my helper app can do and I can easily add more if necessary.
The helper app will basically setup the XPC connection and event handler stuff and wait for a connection and commands. The commands will just be a dictionary so you check for the appropriate keys/values and do whatever.
I can provide more details and code if you need more help, but this question is 9 months old so I don't want to waste time giving you details you've already figured out.
I need some help figuring out the best way to proceed with creating a Rails 3 engine(or plugin, and/or gem).
Apologies for the length of this question...here's part 1:
My company uses an email service provider to send all of our outbound customer emails. They have created a SOAP web service and I have incorporated it into a sample Rails 3 app. The goal of creating an app first was so that I could then take that code and turn it into a gem.
Here's some of the background: The SOAP service has 23 actions in all and, in creating my sample app, I grouped similar actions together. Some of these actions involve uploading/downloading mailing lists and HTML content via the SOAP WS and, as a result, there is a MySQL database with a few tables to store HTML content and lists as a sort of "staging area".
All in all, I have 5 models to contain the SOAP actions (they do not inherit from ActiveRecord::Base) and 3 models that interact with the MySQL database.
I also have a corresponding controller for each model and a view for each SOAP action that I used to help me test the actions as I implemented them.
So...I'm not sure where to go from here. My code needs a lot of DRY-ing up. For example, the WS requires that the user authentication info be sent in the envelope body of each request. So, that means each method in the model has the same auth info hard coded into it which is extremely repetitive; obviously I'd like for that to be cleaner. I also look back now through the code and see that the requests themselves are repetitive and could probably be consolidated.
All of that I think I can figure out on my own, but here is something that seems obvious but I can't figure out. How can I create methods that can be used in all of my models (thinking specifically of the user auth part of the equation).
Here's part 2:
My intention from the beginning has been to extract my code and package it into a gem incase any of my ESP's other clients could use it (plus I'll be using it in several different apps). However, I'd like for it to be very configurable. There should be a default minimal configuration (i.e. just models that wrap the SOAP actions) created just by adding the gem to a Gemfile. However, I'd also like for there to be some tools available (like generators or Rake tasks) to get a user started. What I have in mind is options to create migration files, models, controllers, or views (or the whole nine yards if they want).
So, here's where I'm stuck on knowing whether I should pursue the plugin or engine route. I read Jordan West's series on creating an engine and I really like the thought of that, but I'm not sure if that is the right route for me.
So if you've read this far and I haven't confused the hell out of you, I could use some guidance :)
Thanks
Let's answer your question in parts.
Part One
Ruby's flexibility means you can share code across all of your models extremely easily. Are they extending any sort of class? If they are, simply add the methods to the parent object like so:
class SOAPModel
def request(action, params)
# Request code goes in here
end
end
Then it's simply a case of calling request in your respective models. Alternatively, you could access this method statically with SOAPModel.request. It's really up to you. Otherwise, if (for some bizarre reason) you can't touch a parent object, you could define the methods dynamically:
[User, Post, Message, Comment, File].each do |model|
model.send :define_method, :request, proc { |action, params|
# Request code goes in here
}
end
It's Ruby, so there are tons of ways of doing it.
Part Two
Gems are more than flexible to handle your problem; both Rails and Rake are pretty smart and will look inside your gem (as long as it's in your environment file and Gemfile). Create a generators directory and a /name/name_generator.rb where name is the name of your generator. The just run rails g name and you're there. Same goes for Rake (tasks).
I hope that helps!