I would like to be able to create a module as an interaction between sugarCRM and an other database. For that I built a module thanks to the module builder tool, and I would like to connect it to a new table which is a join between sugar data and my second app data (to prevent data duplication).
As my new table for the module is a view between two others, sugar views the content without any problem, but throws an exception whenever I try to insert anything. So I would like to use a logic hook who will directly store the data within the two "original" tables.
Here is my problem : even if the data are correctly stored, I would like to prevent sugar to try to store anything. Is there something I can do within my hook to stop sugar action, once my hook finished its job ?
Sorry for my terrible english and thanks for reading.
What I recommend is overriding the Save method in your custom module's controller.
Once you build and deploy the module, there will be a new directory: custom/modules/yourcustommodule. In that directory, create a file named controller.php.
That file should include the following (untested) code:
require_once('include/MVC/Controller/SugarController.php');
class yourcustommoduleController extends SugarController {
function action_save() {
return;
}
}
You could even move your before/after hooks into this custom action function. As long as you don't call the default save method (parent::action_save(); I think), SugarCRM's default save action(s) won't happen.
Important: after deploying a custom module, SugarCRM's best practice is to never redeploy it, but to make all subsequent changes in Studio. This is important because once you make these file-level changes to a custom module, those changes would be lost if you redeploy the module.
Related
I am developing a web app using Oracle ADF. I have a bounded task flow. In that I have a search page like below.
I have created the above two forms using view object data controls.
Searching is performing well. But my problem is when I go some where else in my application using menus provided left side and come back to the search page , the page is not getting refreshed. I am getting a search page that contains old search results. At this point of time if I am trying to make any changes am getting some error called "Another user with this id already modifed data ....". After this error my app is not running. Means what ever am trying to do its showing the same error.
So I need to make this: "When ever the user come to this form, He should get fresh form. It should not contain old search results.
Please help me. How do I achieve this.
Thank you.
There are 2 ways of doing it:
1) Set your task flow as ISOLATED, from Task Flow Overview tab -> Behaviour -> Share Data Control with calling task flow -> unchecked (or isolated, if you are using JDev 12c)
This will ensure you always start FRESH when accessing the page, but it will potentially create a performance overhead because entire View Object cache will be recreated (requeried) on page load. Nevertheless, it is the quickest solution.
2) You may create a default Method Call Activity in your task flow from where you may call a AM's custom method that resets the view criteria. The method will be placed on application module's implementation class and it may look like this:
public void initTaskFlow() {
this.getViewObject1().executeEmptyRowSet();
}
This will clean the result data. If you want to reset the querying parameters as well, you can use this example:
http://www.jobinesh.com/2011/04/programmatically-resetting-and-search.html
When you made any changes to any viewObject then excute this viewObject to match entity state and viewState , i think excuting viewObject will solve your issue
Ashish
I'm writing a variety of Model Tests in CakePHP (PHPUnit)
In TravisCI, I get something like: "Base table or view not found: 1146 Table 'test.events'
In Cake's test runner I get an assertion failure.
The problem I am having is there are methods in my ModelClasses that I am trying to test which call other models with App::uses. For example:
Method on User model:
public function getOtherData() {
App::uses('Event', 'Model');
$this->Event = new Event;
return $this->Event->find('all');
}
And the test:
public function testGetOtherData() {
$result = $this->User->getOtherData();
$this->assertTrue(!empty($result));
}
Note the above example is just that. An example, simplified to show the problem. I understand that the above example has better 'cake' ways of doing it.
Also, I am using defining required fixtures and they work just fine. (I know this by another method in the model which uses a join in the find, instead of App::Uses())
EDIT:
The code when run works, BUT the UnitTest is looking for the other models data (When using App::uses) in the default database, and not the test database. Why doesn't it use the test database? Am I missing something?
LAST NOTE
Using App::uses() and then instantiating the class will work at runtime. But during testing it will fail, as it attempts to use the default database connection, instead of the test database connection.
Per the selected answer, rather than using App::uses, Cakes built in class registry, ClassRegistry::init('Model', true);, you can include a Model from inside another model method.
It's not generally a good idea to instantiate an object in the middle of your functions using the new statement. This is why -- there's no way to block or redirect that call. Also, it's not necessarily easy to get the right parameters to the object's constructor when it's in the middle of another function, so it's best to keep that code separate.
The right way to do this is to use a different method call to get your object. If you use Cake's ClassRegistry::init() to create model objects, they should use the test database.
If you need to create other non-Cake objects, it's best to create them using some other function, e.g. $this->fetchMeOneOThemEventThingies(). Then, during testing, you can mock out that function and have it return something else. Or, you could use some other DI container like pimple, which will take the same role as Cake's ClassRegistry.
If you need a mock model object for testing, be sure to pass the appropriate arguments to the model's constructor as the third parameter to getMock(), or it may use the production database.
I'm trying to wrap my head around backbone.js but I'm finding it hard due to the lack of (IMO) good examples.
First of all, what is the best way of getting a link to an object.
If I want to get the edit url of an Album model I could do album.url() + '/edit', is this really the best way?
Also, I'm trying to make my application work 100% without javascript so I don't want my URLs/links to say /albums/#1/edit, I want it to be /albums/1/edit and override this in JS.
I'm thinking I create normal URLs and use jQuery.live to call router.navigate in backbone.js
I never got this to work however, when I call router.navigate('/albums/2', true) the URL changes but my show action is never called. If I refresh it's called so the route is matched.
What am I missing?
The basic answer, which is kind of frustrating, is "there is no preferred way!". Backbone.js doesn't tell you how to set up links, you can do it any way you like. I found this flexibility just as annoying as you do, at least at first.
So here's the way I'm approaching this on my current project, with the (big) caveat that this is just one of many ways to do things in Backbone:
For the most part, I don't use actual links. There's no explicit reason not to, but it means you have to keep track of a bunch of URL strings that have to be consistent. I would rather stick all the URL formatting in my routers and not deal with it elsewhere.
To open a new "top-level" view, like an editing screen, I set something that fires an event. In the application I'm currently working on, I have a global State model, and to open a new view I call state.set({ topview: MyTopView }). This causes the state object to trigger change:topview.
Any piece of the UI that needs to change when the top-level view changes has an update method bound to change:topview. When the event fires, they look at state.get('topview') and update as necessary.
I treat my routers as only marginally specialized parts of the UI - they're essentially views that render in the browser address bar, rather than the window. Like other views, they update the state object on UI events (i.e. a new URL), and like other views, they listen to the state object for changes that cause them to update. The logic that the editing screen has the URL albums/<albumid>/edit is fully encapsulated in the router, and I don't refer to it anywhere else.
This works well for me, but it adds an entirely new pattern, the global State object, to the Backbone structure, so I can hardly call this the "preferred" approach.
Update: Also note that .url(), in the Backbone idiom, refers to the model's URL in the back-end API, not the front-end URL (it's not like Django's get_absolute_url). There is no method in the default Backbone setup that gives you a user-facing URL for your model - you'd have to write this yourself.
Also, I'm trying to make my application work 100% without javascript; so I don't want my URLs/links to say /albums/#1/edit, I want it to be /albums/1/edit and override this in JS.
you can do exactly this w/ pushState. just enable it in your Backbone.history.start call:
Backbone.history.start({pushState: true})
this tells Backbone to use the HTML5 History API (a.k.a. "PushState"), which uses full URLs exactly like you're wanting.
read up on the history api here: http://diveintohtml5.ep.io/history.html
and I wrote up a 2 part series on using pushstate w/ the second part focusing on progressive enhancement in backbone, to do what you're needing:
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/09/26/seo-and-accessibility-with-html5-pushstate-part-1-introducing-pushstate/
and
http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2011/09/26/seo-and-accessibility-with-html5-pushstate-part-2-progressive-enhancement-with-backbone-js/
hope that helps :)
We had an outsourced engineer work on a quick feature DELETING items listed in our database. He says that the code is difficult because the "controller" is missing. Is there a pre-loaded controller for every function like that in cake, or is it weird that he is expecting a controller to be there for a feature we didn't have yet.
There is a generic AppController, but that's more of an abstract class in practice (you generally derive your other controllers from that).
It's not that weird at all that he's expecting a controller -- after all, you won't be able to call methods in the models (which is how I'm guessing you're doing delete) unless you have a point of control to call them from. In this case, the point of control is the controller.
So you can just create a controller. Here's a template to start from:
class SomeController extends AppController {
function delete() {
$this->Some->delete();
}
}
Then access /somes/delete (remember, URLs are generally /controller/action).
Now, he could be talking about the Cake Bake CLI app. That will take your DB tables, and walk you through an initial basic setup for your app. Generally it creates a basic skeleton for CRUD actions.
Either way, you need to create a controller (manually, or via Bake).
When you use the Cake bake function, it'll create all the controllers for you. When you don't use it, you'll need to create them manually. It makes no sense to make all the controllers at the begin, just make them when you really gonna write them would be good.
If you do not have a controller in CakePHP when you visit a page (http://www.youraddress.com/Newfeature) you receive a missing controller error:
Error: NewfeatureController could not be found.
Error: Create the class NewfeatureController below in file: app\controllers\newfeature_controller.php
You cannot get or delete data from the database without controllers - Understanding Model-View-Controller. You do not need the controller only for static pages in CakePHP.
I need to make sure certain essential data are loaded before a module is loaded and shown on screen. considering the async nature of data loading in silverlight, I was wondering if there is a pattern I should follow to load my data (like an event on the module or the bootstrap to hook into, or a method to override)...
you can set module InitializationMode to OnDemand and once you have your data call moduleManager.LoadModule("YourModuleName"); as described here.
There's another alternative as well. If you know you're going to need the module, and the data is statically stored inside another module, you can establish dependencies:
ModuleCatalog m = new ModuleCatalog();
...
m.AddModule(typeof(PersonModule.PersonModule), "ModuleA");
In this scenario, your module in question would establish a dependency on whatever module has the data, and this would ensure that the data is loaded before-hand.