Replies

Avatar

Avatar

Gaurav-Behl

MVP

Avatar

Gaurav-Behl

MVP

Gaurav-Behl
MVP

05-03-2019

I've tested it on 6.1 & 6.4 with sling:Folder and it worked fine.

This feature is agnostic of AEM version. Iconography doesn't matter, you could still configure the properties on that sling:Folder and test.

Avatar

Avatar

abhijitch

Avatar

abhijitch

abhijitch

05-03-2019

Thanks Gaurav. I again tried with sling:Folder. But versioning is not getting reflected. Can you please guide how to check in local whether versioning is working. What I have tried is run a page from content folder, then checked the source code whether any query parameter is appended with the js file.

Avatar

Avatar

Ivo_Eersels

Avatar

Ivo_Eersels

Ivo_Eersels

26-03-2019

Hi

I am on AEM 6.4 too. For me it is even stranger... I seems to work with a node of type nt:unstructured, but only on AUTHOR instance with a url which contains the /editor.html/ for triggering the authoring widgets in it. If I leave out the /editor.html, the md5 hashes disappear from all the clientlib references in the HTML markup.

On PUBLISH the feature doesn't seem to be active either (due to not using editor.html in the url?)

I have no idea why this is happening. Any hints?

Avatar

Avatar

Gaurav-Behl

MVP

Avatar

Gaurav-Behl

MVP

Gaurav-Behl
MVP

26-03-2019

Probably, it is enabled/tied to runmode configuration

Check if you have "config.author" or similar rather than "config" folder in your setup:    /apps/myapp/config/rewriter/versioned-clientlibs.xml

Avatar

Avatar

Ivo_Eersels

Avatar

Ivo_Eersels

Ivo_Eersels

26-03-2019

Sorry, no not at all. As you normally want this feature active in all runmodes (author and publish) this shouldn't be in a runmode specific folder in my opinion. Even if it was, I stated that it works and doesn't work with 2 urls patterns on AUTHOR.

I think I fixed it though. In our project we had another rewriter configuration active next to the 'versioned-clientlibs' node. It had a 'Paths' property value of '/content/...' in it. So I figured, what if that one is overwriting the result of my versioned-clientlibs? If you add the '/editor.html' I assume this no longer matches that path and that second one isn't applied?

The second on had order '10', while my versioned-clientlib config had order '1'. So I figured to see what happens if I reverse the order, so I set the order value on versioned-clientlibs to '11' and making sure it was of type {Long}. And voila, problem disappeared!

So please guys look at http://localhost:4502/system/console/status-slingrewriter and check the order value of your config.

I assume similar rewriters for the [text/html] content type have Paths, Selectors or Resource Types defined so they don't conflict with your config. If you find one with a similar setup, just try to give the 'versioned-clientlibs' a higher order value to see it is applied last.

Hope it works for you guys too! Cheers!

Avatar

Avatar

Gaurav-Behl

MVP

Avatar

Gaurav-Behl

MVP

Gaurav-Behl
MVP

26-03-2019

Good to know that it worked for you, however, I don't see any URI/URL path in this configuration. Its only resource path or resource type. "/editor.html" is not a part of any resource path but url path, that explains why it was broken.

Yes, order/rank would matter.

Avatar

Avatar

Ivo_Eersels

Avatar

Ivo_Eersels

Ivo_Eersels

27-03-2019

I stated in my post "in our project" so ofcourse there is no path in this configuration. The screenshots above are not related to my project and the url I posted points to your own running AEM instance?

Furthermore I believe that the screenshots with the black rectangles is flawed in a sense that it also mentions content types text/javascript and text/css? In my understanding you want to rewrite links inside a text/html response which point to a clientlib. So I don't understand why you would need to mention the other resource types. The ACS Commons feature mentions that it doesn't work for references inside javascript or css files I believe. I guess it doesn't break anything, but as I am getting such nice feedback here I wanted to bounce my idea so hopefully someone can confirm or reject it.

Avatar

Avatar

tahir1601

Avatar

tahir1601

tahir1601

13-01-2020

why should the node be in 4 level path. In my case its 5 level down as per site structure. What should I do in that case? @Jörg_Hoh  @smacdonald2008