eLua Web Builder Tutorial

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Dado Sutter Dado Sutter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Hello,
   An entry-level tutorial for the eLua Web Builder is now available on the eLua User Labs at the Tutorials' page or directly at http://wiki.eluaproject.net/eLuaWebBuilderBasics
  Time is always short and my english is far from decent so any help is welcome. Any registered user on the wiki can edit that (and other) entries.
  This actually takes (at least for me) more time to create than recording a video so I may try this option one of these days too.

Best
Dado


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Martin Guy Martin Guy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

> http://wiki.eluaproject.net/eLuaWebBuilderBasics

Hi
  Nice idea. Unfortunately using it here with ubuntu and firefox I
find I can't add files to the ROMFS image.  On "Rom filesystem - add
files" I get the popup box shadowing the main window but clicking the
"add files" button does nothing (well, the button goes down and up but
nothing more)d enabled.

Is anyone else seeing similar problems?

FWIW, I do have java and javascript present an

   M
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Mauricio Henrique Bomfim Mauricio Henrique Bomfim
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Martin,

    It's working well to me with Ubuntu ( Linux 2.6.32-22-generic
#33-Ubuntu SMP Wed Apr 28 13:27:30 UTC 2010 i686 GNU/Linux ) and
Firefox 3.6.3.

    Notice that you should first send your files to the server using
the button "BROWSER" to select your local files and then "upload
files". After that you have to select the files you want on romfs by
clicking on + (plus button).  It's a bit confusing, but we have
problems to change this "BROWSER" button on our flash component.

[]'s

Mauricio

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> http://wiki.eluaproject.net/eLuaWebBuilderBasics
>
> Hi
>  Nice idea. Unfortunately using it here with ubuntu and firefox I
> find I can't add files to the ROMFS image.  On "Rom filesystem - add
> files" I get the popup box shadowing the main window but clicking the
> "add files" button does nothing (well, the button goes down and up but
> nothing more)d enabled.
>
> Is anyone else seeing similar problems?
>
> FWIW, I do have java and javascript present an
>
>   M
> _______________________________________________
> eLua-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
>
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Martin Guy Martin Guy
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  > Unfortunately using it here with ubuntu and firefox I
>  > find I can't add files to the ROMFS image.  On "Rom filesystem - add
>  > files" I get the popup box shadowing the main window but clicking the
>  > "add files" button does nothing (well, the button goes down and up but
>  > nothing more)d enabled.
>  >
>  > Is anyone else seeing similar problems?

On 8/9/10, Mauricio Henrique Bomfim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>     Notice that you should first send your files to the server using
>  the button "BROWSER" to select your local files and then "upload
>  files". After that you have to select the files you want on romfs by
>  clicking on + (plus button).  It's a bit confusing, but we have
>  problems to change this "BROWSER" button on our flash component.

I see no BROWSER button here.  I have two buttons on the main page:
"New Build" and "Upload Files".

Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
"Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
server end?

    M
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Dado Sutter Dado Sutter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Hello there,

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 05:38, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
..............

On 8/9/10, Mauricio Henrique Bomfim <[hidden email]> wrote:
>     Notice that you should first send your files to the server using
>  the button "BROWSER" to select your local files and then "upload
>  files". After that you have to select the files you want on romfs by
>  clicking on + (plus button).  It's a bit confusing, but we have
>  problems to change this "BROWSER" button on our flash component.

I see no BROWSER button here.  I have two buttons on the main page:
"New Build" and "Upload Files".

   Hi Marting. Right above the Upload Files button there is a doesn't-look-too-much-like-a-button-and-we-can-change-it-eventually button labeled BROWSE (not BROWSER).
   Clicking on it will bring you a dialog where you can select (multiple) files and upload them (simultaneously) to your "Stored Files Area", where they'll be kept for you to be used in your builds.
   Once you have files in your stored files area, each time you do a "New Build" (or edit a previous build configuration) you can select files from this area to be included in the ROMFS.
 
Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
"Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
server end?

   Humm, I feel that this will raise some more nice discussions here :) and we'll see what is best for everyone. The basic "Upload file" mechanism as you called, like many other fancy things we can do with flash, doesn't support multiple/simultaneous file uploads.
   I'm not sure if one can live without Flash locally and although any closed-source black-box is indeed a security-hole, I don't remember having heard about big problems with Flash.
   
Thanks again for the reports and feedback

   M

Best
Dado





 
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Kevin Vermeer Kevin Vermeer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 05:38, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
>> black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
>> If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
>> as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
>> "Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
>> server end?
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Dado Sutter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>    Humm, I feel that this will raise some more nice discussions here :) and we'll
> see what is best for everyone. The basic "Upload file" mechanism as you called,
>  like many other fancy things we can do with flash, doesn't support
> multiple/simultaneous file uploads.
>    I'm not sure if one can live without Flash locally and although any closed-source
> black-box is indeed a security-hole, I don't remember having heard about big
> problems with Flash.

If you're asking whether one can live without Flash on their machine,
the answer is probably 'yes'.  Apple has sold millions of iPod
Touches, iPhones, and iPads, none of which use Flash.  I use the
Firefox FlashBlock addon, and only occasionally choose to enable it.
The swfupload project (http://code.google.com/p/swfupload/) wraps the
uploader in Javascript to enable a fallback mechanism if the Flash
doesn't run, and the gmail attachment uploader offers a settings page
which can be configured to use either Flash or the HTML uploader.   If
we could duplicate this fall-back functionality, I think that would be
acceptable to all.

I'll probably whitelist the web builder, but I'd rather not see us
dependent on Flash  for a number of reasons:
 - It's a security hole. Flash security problems allow more control
over the user's computer (Webcam? Microphone?) than other programs
which need security patches.
 - It's a buggy program.  I experience crashes more often due to the
Flash plugin than for any other reason.
 - It's a bandwidth hog.  An HTML based uploader would load the page
faster, put less stress on your servers (which should be optimized for
the build process) and take less space on my limited internet
connection. Also, flash ads.
 - It's a CPU/memory hog.   Hopefully this is not an issue for the
little upload script, but playing fullscreen video in Flash takes more
system resources than  any alternative video options I've used.
 - It's a black box.  Enough said.

I respect your choice to provide Flash based services, but I hope you
understand that users may choose not to use them.  I too hope that
this can remain a "nice discussion."
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
BogdanM BogdanM
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 05:38, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
>> black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
>> If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
>> as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
>> "Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
>> server end?
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Dado Sutter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>    Humm, I feel that this will raise some more nice discussions here :) and we'll
> see what is best for everyone. The basic "Upload file" mechanism as you called,
>  like many other fancy things we can do with flash, doesn't support
> multiple/simultaneous file uploads.
>    I'm not sure if one can live without Flash locally and although any closed-source
> black-box is indeed a security-hole, I don't remember having heard about big
> problems with Flash.

If you're asking whether one can live without Flash on their machine,
the answer is probably 'yes'.  Apple has sold millions of iPod
Touches, iPhones, and iPads, none of which use Flash.  I use the
Firefox FlashBlock addon, and only occasionally choose to enable it.
The swfupload project (http://code.google.com/p/swfupload/) wraps the
uploader in Javascript to enable a fallback mechanism if the Flash
doesn't run, and the gmail attachment uploader offers a settings page
which can be configured to use either Flash or the HTML uploader.   If
we could duplicate this fall-back functionality, I think that would be
acceptable to all.

I'll probably whitelist the web builder, but I'd rather not see us
dependent on Flash  for a number of reasons:
 - It's a security hole. Flash security problems allow more control
over the user's computer (Webcam? Microphone?) than other programs
which need security patches.
 - It's a buggy program.  I experience crashes more often due to the
Flash plugin than for any other reason.
 - It's a bandwidth hog.  An HTML based uploader would load the page
faster, put less stress on your servers (which should be optimized for
the build process) and take less space on my limited internet
connection. Also, flash ads.
 - It's a CPU/memory hog.   Hopefully this is not an issue for the
little upload script, but playing fullscreen video in Flash takes more
system resources than  any alternative video options I've used.
 - It's a black box.  Enough said.

I respect your choice to provide Flash based services, but I hope you
understand that users may choose not to use them.  I too hope that
this can remain a "nice discussion."

Wait, our builder depends on Flash ? :) I must confess that I completely missed this. If so, I'd very much like to change that, if at all possible, for the reasons outlined above by Kevin. One can upload using regular HTTP (see for example http://www.websupergoo.com/file-upload-1.htm, the first link that I google came up with for "http upload").

Thanks,
Bogdan
 
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Kevin Vermeer Kevin Vermeer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Oh, and I should also point out that the word "Intelligent" is
misspelled in the "Main Uses->Inteligent Sensors"[sic] dropdown on the
account creation page.  Not sure if this is the place, but it needs to
get fixed.
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Vagner nascimento Vagner nascimento
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Reported, Thanks.
Vagner

2010/8/10 Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]>
Oh, and I should also point out that the word "Intelligent" is
misspelled in the "Main Uses->Inteligent Sensors"[sic] dropdown on the
account creation page.  Not sure if this is the place, but it needs to
get fixed.
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Vagner nascimento Vagner nascimento
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

In reply to this post by Kevin Vermeer
Hello Kevin and Martin, We alredy know that some limitations of the current uploader but was simple to implement and most of cases works well. As soon as possible we'll change for a more flexible and compatible widget.

Thanks for the report.
Vagner

2010/8/10 Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 05:38, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
>> black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
>> If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
>> as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
>> "Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
>> server end?
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Dado Sutter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>    Humm, I feel that this will raise some more nice discussions here :) and we'll
> see what is best for everyone. The basic "Upload file" mechanism as you called,
>  like many other fancy things we can do with flash, doesn't support
> multiple/simultaneous file uploads.
>    I'm not sure if one can live without Flash locally and although any closed-source
> black-box is indeed a security-hole, I don't remember having heard about big
> problems with Flash.

If you're asking whether one can live without Flash on their machine,
the answer is probably 'yes'.  Apple has sold millions of iPod
Touches, iPhones, and iPads, none of which use Flash.  I use the
Firefox FlashBlock addon, and only occasionally choose to enable it.
The swfupload project (http://code.google.com/p/swfupload/) wraps the
uploader in Javascript to enable a fallback mechanism if the Flash
doesn't run, and the gmail attachment uploader offers a settings page
which can be configured to use either Flash or the HTML uploader.   If
we could duplicate this fall-back functionality, I think that would be
acceptable to all.

I'll probably whitelist the web builder, but I'd rather not see us
dependent on Flash  for a number of reasons:
 - It's a security hole. Flash security problems allow more control
over the user's computer (Webcam? Microphone?) than other programs
which need security patches.
 - It's a buggy program.  I experience crashes more often due to the
Flash plugin than for any other reason.
 - It's a bandwidth hog.  An HTML based uploader would load the page
faster, put less stress on your servers (which should be optimized for
the build process) and take less space on my limited internet
connection. Also, flash ads.
 - It's a CPU/memory hog.   Hopefully this is not an issue for the
little upload script, but playing fullscreen video in Flash takes more
system resources than  any alternative video options I've used.
 - It's a black box.  Enough said.

I respect your choice to provide Flash based services, but I hope you
understand that users may choose not to use them.  I too hope that
this can remain a "nice discussion."
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
BogdanM BogdanM
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Vagner nascimento <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello Kevin and Martin, We alredy know that some limitations of the current uploader but was simple to implement and most of cases works well. As soon as possible we'll change for a more flexible and compatible widget.

What exactly do you mean by "widget" in this context?

Thanks,
Bogdan
 

Thanks for the report.
Vagner

2010/8/10 Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 05:38, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
>> black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
>> If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
>> as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
>> "Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
>> server end?
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Dado Sutter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>    Humm, I feel that this will raise some more nice discussions here :) and we'll
> see what is best for everyone. The basic "Upload file" mechanism as you called,
>  like many other fancy things we can do with flash, doesn't support
> multiple/simultaneous file uploads.
>    I'm not sure if one can live without Flash locally and although any closed-source
> black-box is indeed a security-hole, I don't remember having heard about big
> problems with Flash.

If you're asking whether one can live without Flash on their machine,
the answer is probably 'yes'.  Apple has sold millions of iPod
Touches, iPhones, and iPads, none of which use Flash.  I use the
Firefox FlashBlock addon, and only occasionally choose to enable it.
The swfupload project (http://code.google.com/p/swfupload/) wraps the
uploader in Javascript to enable a fallback mechanism if the Flash
doesn't run, and the gmail attachment uploader offers a settings page
which can be configured to use either Flash or the HTML uploader.   If
we could duplicate this fall-back functionality, I think that would be
acceptable to all.

I'll probably whitelist the web builder, but I'd rather not see us
dependent on Flash  for a number of reasons:
 - It's a security hole. Flash security problems allow more control
over the user's computer (Webcam? Microphone?) than other programs
which need security patches.
 - It's a buggy program.  I experience crashes more often due to the
Flash plugin than for any other reason.
 - It's a bandwidth hog.  An HTML based uploader would load the page
faster, put less stress on your servers (which should be optimized for
the build process) and take less space on my limited internet
connection. Also, flash ads.
 - It's a CPU/memory hog.   Hopefully this is not an issue for the
little upload script, but playing fullscreen video in Flash takes more
system resources than  any alternative video options I've used.
 - It's a black box.  Enough said.

I respect your choice to provide Flash based services, but I hope you
understand that users may choose not to use them.  I too hope that
this can remain a "nice discussion."
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev



_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Dado Sutter Dado Sutter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

In reply to this post by Kevin Vermeer


On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:00, Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Oh, and I should also point out that the word "Intelligent" is
misspelled in the "Main Uses->Inteligent Sensors"[sic] dropdown on the
account creation page.  Not sure if this is the place, but it needs to
get fixed.

Thanks for this too.
--
Kevin Vermeer

Best
Dado




 
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev
Vagner nascimento Vagner nascimento
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: eLua Web Builder Tutorial

In reply to this post by BogdanM
Hi Bogdan, the current is JQuery Uploadify. The issue report is about upload files without flash installed, then we are working to provide this.

Thanks.
Vagner

2010/8/10 Bogdan Marinescu <[hidden email]>
Hi,

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Vagner nascimento <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello Kevin and Martin, We alredy know that some limitations of the current uploader but was simple to implement and most of cases works well. As soon as possible we'll change for a more flexible and compatible widget.

What exactly do you mean by "widget" in this context?

Thanks,
Bogdan
 

Thanks for the report.
Vagner

2010/8/10 Kevin Vermeer <[hidden email]>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 05:38, Martin Guy <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Note that I don't use Adobe flash player because it is a closed-source
>> black-box security hole. Is that what you mean by "flash component"?
>> If so, a simpler interface would be more open-source friendly, as well
>> as opening the site to many more browsers. I thought basic HTML had an
>> "Upload file" mechanism, but maybe that won't do what you need at the
>> server end?
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Dado Sutter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>    Humm, I feel that this will raise some more nice discussions here :) and we'll
> see what is best for everyone. The basic "Upload file" mechanism as you called,
>  like many other fancy things we can do with flash, doesn't support
> multiple/simultaneous file uploads.
>    I'm not sure if one can live without Flash locally and although any closed-source
> black-box is indeed a security-hole, I don't remember having heard about big
> problems with Flash.

If you're asking whether one can live without Flash on their machine,
the answer is probably 'yes'.  Apple has sold millions of iPod
Touches, iPhones, and iPads, none of which use Flash.  I use the
Firefox FlashBlock addon, and only occasionally choose to enable it.
The swfupload project (http://code.google.com/p/swfupload/) wraps the
uploader in Javascript to enable a fallback mechanism if the Flash
doesn't run, and the gmail attachment uploader offers a settings page
which can be configured to use either Flash or the HTML uploader.   If
we could duplicate this fall-back functionality, I think that would be
acceptable to all.

I'll probably whitelist the web builder, but I'd rather not see us
dependent on Flash  for a number of reasons:
 - It's a security hole. Flash security problems allow more control
over the user's computer (Webcam? Microphone?) than other programs
which need security patches.
 - It's a buggy program.  I experience crashes more often due to the
Flash plugin than for any other reason.
 - It's a bandwidth hog.  An HTML based uploader would load the page
faster, put less stress on your servers (which should be optimized for
the build process) and take less space on my limited internet
connection. Also, flash ads.
 - It's a CPU/memory hog.   Hopefully this is not an issue for the
little upload script, but playing fullscreen video in Flash takes more
system resources than  any alternative video options I've used.
 - It's a black box.  Enough said.

I respect your choice to provide Flash based services, but I hope you
understand that users may choose not to use them.  I too hope that
this can remain a "nice discussion."
--
Kevin Vermeer
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev


_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev



_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev



_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev