You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Matt Raible <ma...@raibledesigns.com> on 2002/12/17 18:22:39 UTC
Module path-mapping limitation
Is there a bug that I can reference (in my writing) for the limitation
that modules can only be used with extension-mapping (*.do) rather than
path-mapping (/do/*)?
If this has been fixed, please let me know.
Matt
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Module path-mapping limitation
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
It's not so much a bug as a design flaw. The current approach to
prepending the module is under-designed and just jams it in.
Though, I keep meaning to check whether the template feature we
added later ($M$P) could be used to get around this somehow.
-Ted.
12/17/2002 12:22:39 PM, Matt Raible <ma...@raibledesigns.com>
wrote:
>Is there a bug that I can reference (in my writing) for the
limitation
>that modules can only be used with extension-mapping (*.do)
rather than
>path-mapping (/do/*)?
>
>If this has been fixed, please let me know.
>
>Matt
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-
unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-
help@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Module path-mapping limitation
Posted by Matt Raible <ma...@raibledesigns.com>.
I don't really *need* this feature personally, so I'm probably not
justified in submitting an enhancement request. If I do decide to
develop a module as part of my sample application, I'll try switching
from *.do to /do/* and then log a bug if I feel it's necessary.
Thanks,
Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martinc@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:19 PM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: Re: Module path-mapping limitation
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Matt Raible wrote:
>
> > Is there a bug that I can reference (in my writing) for the
> limitation
> > that modules can only be used with extension-mapping (*.do) rather
> > than path-mapping (/do/*)?
>
> I don't see a bug report for that in Bugzilla, so feel free
> to submit an enhancement request. It is still an open issue.
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
> >
> > If this has been fixed, please let me know.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:struts-dev-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For
> additional commands,
> e-mail:
> > <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:struts-dev-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For
> additional commands,
> e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Module path-mapping limitation
Posted by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>.
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Matt Raible wrote:
> Is there a bug that I can reference (in my writing) for the limitation
> that modules can only be used with extension-mapping (*.do) rather than
> path-mapping (/do/*)?
I don't see a bug report for that in Bugzilla, so feel free to submit an
enhancement request. It is still an open issue.
--
Martin Cooper
>
> If this has been fixed, please let me know.
>
> Matt
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>