Senthil is correct. This checkbox requirement has been in the
guideline for many years, maybe from the day when i start working on
the GUI :)
Definitely since v2.0 timeframe.
Anissa.
Senthil Chidambaram wrote:
> Kedar,
> As far as I remember, the checkbox Enabled label was there for quite
> some time including V2. I'm not sure which screen we didn't have
> this, might be an UI bug, that UIRB team didn't notice this.
>
> thx
> Senthil
>
> On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:08 AM, Kedar Mhaswade wrote:
>
>> Thanks Anissa. But I am sorry, I don't agree.
>>
>> On the GUI, we don't have to mimic what's there in the schema (which
>> is confusing, IMO).
>>
>> I was *genuinely* confused when I wanted to turn on the security on
>> admin-listener. I think we have regressed here from V2 without any
>> apparent gain because in V2, there was a simple check-box to make
>> admin-listener (or any listener) secure. I can bet you'll get some
>> frowns if we don't make this easy to understand and configure.
>>
>> Remember, end user does not care if security-enabled attribute is
>> on a <network-listener> element or on a <protocol> element. All they
>> want to do is to secure the admin-listener, mostly without having
>> to do the RTFM. Telling them, yeah, there's a way, but you'll need to
>> know and understand this new indirection called "protocols", is a step
>> backwards.
>>
>> Regarding HCI guidelines -- well, I just don't get them. BTW,
>> this was not how we did it for V2. Have the guidelines changed?
>> Labeling an unchecked box as "Enabled" is simply counter-intuitive.
>>
>> Also, my point regarding turning off the feed was -- there should
>> be an obvious way to tell admin console that it does not try to connect
>> to the Internet. We have been there as you know and my question was
>> whether you had a simple flag somewhere that does that. (Also, note that
>> there is an annoying issue of authenticating proxy servers).
>>
>> -Kedar
>>
>> Anissa Lam wrote:
>>> Hi Kedar,
>>> Please see comments inline.
>>> Kedar Mhaswade wrote:
>>>> First off, great job on console! I like the GlassFish News Section.
>>>>
>>>> (I hope there is a way to turn off the Internet access though).
>>> Most of those is RSS feed, so without internet access, you don't see
>>> much.
>>>>
>>>> Hope these are simple questions on GlassFish v3 (latest workspace
>>>> build):
>>>>
>>>> 1- Does anyone know how to turn on "security" on an http-listener?
>>>> I see
>>>> no check-box like interface when I do: Network Config -> Network
>>>> Listeners
>>>> ->(Choose a listener) -> View the property sheet.
>>>>
>>> The security enable attribute is not with the Network Listener, it
>>> is specified in the Protocol that is associated with the listener.
>>> We can improve this by adding a link to the protocol page in the
>>> Listener page itself as there maybe other attributes of the protocol
>>> that one may want to change besides security.
>>> The easiest is click on the Protocol link in the Network Listeners
>>> table (attached listerns-table.gif)
>>> My pet peeve is the name of the Protocol, why a protocal has the
>>> name of "listener" ?? this is too confusing.
>>>> It's hard to find the admin listener. Can we do something about it?
>>>> (like -- Is it possible to provide a link to network listeners
>>>> from HTTP
>>>> Service configuration page?)
>>> Yes, everything is possible, almost, given the time :)
>>>>
>>>> 2- This is general observation with check-boxes. Regardless of
>>>> status of these
>>>> check-boxes, i.e. regardless whether they are checked or
>>>> unchecked, I keep
>>>> on seeing a label named "Enabled" (yes, that's right, even when
>>>> the check-box
>>>> is unchecked, it reads "Enabled").
>>>> I think it is wrong and at times annoys me ;). Can we just remove
>>>> the label?
>>> No. Sorry ;-)
>>> This is in accordance to our HCI-Admin guideline. Specified in
>>> section 7.2.1.1 Checkbox. Please see attached image (checkbox.gif)
>>>> If not, can we change it to obey the visual status of the check-box?
>>> Thats is a label, nothing to do with the actual status of that
>>> attribute.
>>>>
>>>> (See attached image that illustrates the point).
>>> Maybe i am biased, but it is very clear to me that Enabled is not
>>> checked, so, that particular attribute is disabled. :)
>>> Anissa.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Kedar
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>