Changed JS extension support to be more flexible.

 






 

 


  Review Request #5375
  —
  Created Feb. 1, 2014 and submitted 

 


















 

  

   Information

  





 
 

  chipx86
 









 
 

  Djblets
 









 
 

  master
 









 
 

  
 









 
 

  
 






 




 

  

   Reviewers

  





 
 

  djblets
 









 
 

  
 






 








 





  


 
 

  
This replaces the old Extension.js_model_class attribute with a list

of JSExtension subclasses stored in Extension.js_extensions.


Each JSExtension subclass lists a JS model class. It also has an

apply_to field that works like those in bundles and TemplateHook. If not

provided, the extension will be initialized on all pages.


get_js_model_data has also moved to JSExtension, renamed to

get_model_data.


Extensions taking advantage of js_model_class in the Djblets 0.8 alphas

will need to be updated for this change.

 








  


 
 

  
Updated the rbseverity extension for this change, taking advantage of

apply_to, and saw the extension's initialization appear only on the

pages listed.

 







 









 





  








 






 
 
 

  

   

    

     
    

    
    
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
    

   

   

    
     

      Description
      From
      Last Updated
     

    
    



     

      
       
       
This might be more readable as: return url_name in (self.apply_to or [])

      		
      
       daviddavid
      
      
       
      
     


    
   

  

 







 






  

 








 














 





 

  

   




david




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
david


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      djblets/extensions/extension.py
      


       (Diff revision 1)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    This might be more readable as:
    

    

    return url_name in (self.apply_to or [])

    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  


    1. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      I assume you mean:
      

      return url_name in (self.apply_to or [url_name])

      

      I could do that. I was intending to have the default of None mean all, and anything custom-set by the user (including an empty list) being an override of that default. Either way, though, it's weird for someone to set [], since it just won't load.
      
 
      

      2. 



    2. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      I misread the logic here. What you have is good. Ship it.
      
 
      

      3. 


 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  3. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  

 
















 





 

  

   




david




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
david


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    Ship It!
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 















  2. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   




chipx86




   

   

  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 Review request changed

    
   


  

  

  






 

  Status:
  

  Closed (submitted)

  
 







 


 










  

 









     

    

   

  

  

   
   Loading...