You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by Christophe Cordenier <ch...@gmail.com> on 2010/07/27 13:14:29 UTC
T5.2 Active Page Name value
Hi
Please refering to this message from the mailing list
http://markmail.org/thread/7gduddrfgt6atd46 for full stack
Actually, if i understand well Kalle's problem, the real problem is that he
wants to make its security API compatible with T5.1 and T5.2.
To store the active page name, currently we use instance variable is used in
RequestGlobalsImpl, but shouldn't we store this information in the request
scope instead ? That would help people to get T5.2 compatilble API from T5.1
projects...
--
Regards,
Christophe Cordenier.
Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
Re: T5.2 Active Page Name value
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
No, I think it should be the active page, as that is the page that
will ultimately be activated to process the form submission.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Christophe Cordenier
<ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks
>
> Actually, the more i look into this issue, the more i think that the form
> component should not rely on active page to pre-allocate control names, but
> on the current rendering page, that can be different in some cases
> (Exception in our case). This will imply to create a new thread variable...
>
> That would solve the rendering issue and keep consistency with link/loopback
> generation
>
> Any hints ?
>
>
> 2010/7/27 Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
>
>> I've been kind of avoiding putting things into the Request object when
>> there's an alternative, via per-thread services, to store such data in
>> a service, in a typesafe manner. However, I'm not against some
>> refactoring so that a single solution can work for 5.1 and 5.2.
>>
>> Remember that a real goal would be to make the upgrade from 5.1 to 5.2
>> so simple that writing compatibility for 5.1 is not an issue.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Christophe Cordenier
>> <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Please refering to this message from the mailing list
>> > http://markmail.org/thread/7gduddrfgt6atd46 for full stack
>> >
>> > Actually, if i understand well Kalle's problem, the real problem is that
>> he
>> > wants to make its security API compatible with T5.1 and T5.2.
>> >
>> > To store the active page name, currently we use instance variable is used
>> in
>> > RequestGlobalsImpl, but shouldn't we store this information in the
>> request
>> > scope instead ? That would help people to get T5.2 compatilble API from
>> T5.1
>> > projects...
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Christophe Cordenier.
>> >
>> > Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
>> > Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>>
>> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>>
>> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
>> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>>
>> (971) 678-5210
>> http://howardlewisship.com
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Christophe Cordenier.
>
> Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
> Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: T5.2 Active Page Name value
Posted by Christophe Cordenier <ch...@gmail.com>.
Thanks
Actually, the more i look into this issue, the more i think that the form
component should not rely on active page to pre-allocate control names, but
on the current rendering page, that can be different in some cases
(Exception in our case). This will imply to create a new thread variable...
That would solve the rendering issue and keep consistency with link/loopback
generation
Any hints ?
2010/7/27 Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
> I've been kind of avoiding putting things into the Request object when
> there's an alternative, via per-thread services, to store such data in
> a service, in a typesafe manner. However, I'm not against some
> refactoring so that a single solution can work for 5.1 and 5.2.
>
> Remember that a real goal would be to make the upgrade from 5.1 to 5.2
> so simple that writing compatibility for 5.1 is not an issue.
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Christophe Cordenier
> <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Please refering to this message from the mailing list
> > http://markmail.org/thread/7gduddrfgt6atd46 for full stack
> >
> > Actually, if i understand well Kalle's problem, the real problem is that
> he
> > wants to make its security API compatible with T5.1 and T5.2.
> >
> > To store the active page name, currently we use instance variable is used
> in
> > RequestGlobalsImpl, but shouldn't we store this information in the
> request
> > scope instead ? That would help people to get T5.2 compatilble API from
> T5.1
> > projects...
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Christophe Cordenier.
> >
> > Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
> > Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> Creator of Apache Tapestry
>
> The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
> learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
>
> (971) 678-5210
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Regards,
Christophe Cordenier.
Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
Re: T5.2 Active Page Name value
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
I've been kind of avoiding putting things into the Request object when
there's an alternative, via per-thread services, to store such data in
a service, in a typesafe manner. However, I'm not against some
refactoring so that a single solution can work for 5.1 and 5.2.
Remember that a real goal would be to make the upgrade from 5.1 to 5.2
so simple that writing compatibility for 5.1 is not an issue.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Christophe Cordenier
<ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Please refering to this message from the mailing list
> http://markmail.org/thread/7gduddrfgt6atd46 for full stack
>
> Actually, if i understand well Kalle's problem, the real problem is that he
> wants to make its security API compatible with T5.1 and T5.2.
>
> To store the active page name, currently we use instance variable is used in
> RequestGlobalsImpl, but shouldn't we store this information in the request
> scope instead ? That would help people to get T5.2 compatilble API from T5.1
> projects...
>
> --
> Regards,
> Christophe Cordenier.
>
> Committer on Apache Tapestry 5
> Co-creator of wooki @wookicentral.com
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me to
learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast!
(971) 678-5210
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org