RadControlsConfig Root-Level Folder

6 posts, 0 answers
  1. Shaun Peet
    Shaun Peet avatar
    571 posts
    Member since:
    Aug 2004

    Posted 19 Jan 2006 Link to this post

    In doing updates with some applications that are using nearly all of the controls, I find it much quicker to overwrite the entire RadControls folder in the root of the app.  More often than I'd like to admit, this over-writes the customizations that I've made to any of the xml config files for each control.  Now, I know that may sound like a bit of whining, and I know that all I'd have to do is backup the configuration files before over-writing, but maybe I can propose another solution that would become the default.

    This would be to have another folder at the root of the application, called RadControlsConfig, which would contain all of the xml files for each control that define its configuration.  Within that folder would be a folder for each control as necessary, as well as a file called "globals.xml" which could define for all the controls, properties that are shared between them.

    Again, I know that this can be accomplished now by creating these folders myself, and moving all the necessary files over.  However, that would also entail changing the default location where the controls "look" for these files.  What I'm thinking about here is that by default, a developer could update all the controls by overwriting the entire RadControls folder without affecting customizations.

    Probably a much more complicated thing to actually do than to suggest, but I had to throw it out there as an idea nonetheless.
  2. Vassil Petev
    Admin
    Vassil Petev avatar
    1765 posts

    Posted 19 Jan 2006 Link to this post

    Hi Shaun,

    Your idea is good and we will review it on our next meeting. An implication I see right away: people hate to see too many installation folders, so we will need to find a balance between your suggestion and our clients' needs. A suggestion is to have this RadControlsConfig folder within the RadControls folder, but not within the products' folders. We will have to measure the impact of having these files outside their current location(s), and should take into account the backwards compatibility.

    Nevertheless, this is a nice suggestion and is in par with the raising demand to provide a single place to setup all controls (i.e. a single telerikConfig file where people can set common properties and ease their development).

    We will be happy to know what the community thinks on this. The more interest and ideas we get - the better chances that we will implement this sooner.



    Best wishes,
    Robert
    the telerik team
  3. Martin de Ruiter
    Martin de Ruiter avatar
    99 posts
    Member since:
    Jun 2005

    Posted 19 Jan 2006 Link to this post

    It's indeed a nice suggestion! I also would like to mention that maybe other customisation like css styles (for some controls I created my own styles) could also be handy in a special config folder.

    Kind regards,

    Martin de Ruiter
  4. Shaun Peet
    Shaun Peet avatar
    571 posts
    Member since:
    Aug 2004

    Posted 20 Jan 2006 Link to this post

    Well, it sounds then like the best option would be to keep the RadControls folder, and add a new RadControlsScript folder instead - which would include the javascript files and any aspx/ascx files needed for each control.  That probably makes more sense anyway, as it would contain the only files that get changed from release to release.
  5. Vassil Petev
    Admin
    Vassil Petev avatar
    1765 posts

    Posted 23 Jan 2006 Link to this post

    Hello Shaun, Martin.

    Sorry for the late reply.

    As you know, the structure of our RadControls folder is pretty simple - it holds a r.a.d.control folder, a folder with the product's version (for upgrading capabilities and to NOT overwrite any used/modified files), and a folder named Scripts which in turn has the file(s) which are needed by the control to function:

    PROJECT ROOT
    + bin
    - RadControls
        - Grid
            - Scripts
                - 3_0_1
                    RadGrid.js

    The only product (r.a.d.designer excluded) that has more files and folders is r.a.d.editor as it needs much more resources, such as popup dialogs, a spellchecker, etc.

    Shaun, I am not sure that we will change this structure and will put all scripts in a single RadControlsScript folder instead. The idea behind the structure above is proper upgrading - if you update/upgrade your application to a new telerik control or version, the old files will remain and you could easily revert back, if something breaks! If we include all scripts in a single RadControlsScript folder, we will be back where we were 2 years ago, i.e. many upgrading problems, broken live applications, etc. We do not want this to happen again :)

    What I suggested (our Developers should think over this suggestion, of course) is to have an extra RadControlsConfig folder, which will hold:
    • all telerik skins used in your app (there is no need to update those with every new release)
    • a telerik.config file to keep common settings of all telerik controls (paths to skin folders, image directories, etc.)
    • CSS files
    • editor's ConfigFiles
    • editor's ToolsFiles
    • XML and other configuration files.
    So, the final structure would be something, like:

    PROJECT ROOT
    + bin
    - RadControls
        + Grid
            + Scripts
        - Editor
            + Scripts
            + Dialogs
            ...
        - RadControlsConfig
            - Grid
                + Skins
            - Editor
                + Skins
                ToolsFile1.xml
                ToolsFile2.xml
                ConfigFile.xml
            telerikConfig.xml

    This way your project will say intact during the update process (as far as properties, skins and code goes). And you will update only the needed files (assemblies and JS files). What do you think of this setup?


    Greetings,
    Robert
    the telerik team
  6. Shaun Peet
    Shaun Peet avatar
    571 posts
    Member since:
    Aug 2004

    Posted 26 Jan 2006 Link to this post

    Sounds great, especially considering that was my original suggestion ;)
Back to Top