You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@isis.apache.org by Robert Matthews <rm...@nakedobjects.org> on 2012/10/16 22:56:24 UTC
Deployment type of Wicket viewer
Dan
Further to our conversation earlier, is there any reason that the Wicket
viewer defaults to a prototype server (a specific Wicket type) where as
any other webapp, such as Scimpi, defaults to server (one of the generic
deployment types)?
Rob
Re: Deployment type of Wicket viewer
Posted by Robert Matthews <rm...@nakedobjects.org>.
Fine. Again, let's deal with this when we review DeploymentType.
On 16/10/12 21:59, Dan Haywood wrote:
> Probably as a workaround (now I think about it) for the problem that you
> hit... that having a deployment type of SERVER means that the "file"
> authoriser is installed by default.
>
> If we get rid of that logic in InstallerLookupDefault where the type of
> authorizer is dependent on the deployment type, and instead always just
> install the "dflt" (ie no-op0 authorizer if not specified, then I'd be
> happy for it to have a deployment type of SERVER.
>
> Dan
>
>
> On 16 October 2012 21:56, Robert Matthews <rm...@nakedobjects.org>wrote:
>
>> Dan
>>
>> Further to our conversation earlier, is there any reason that the Wicket
>> viewer defaults to a prototype server (a specific Wicket type) where as any
>> other webapp, such as Scimpi, defaults to server (one of the generic
>> deployment types)?
>>
>> Rob
>>
Re: Deployment type of Wicket viewer
Posted by Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>.
Probably as a workaround (now I think about it) for the problem that you
hit... that having a deployment type of SERVER means that the "file"
authoriser is installed by default.
If we get rid of that logic in InstallerLookupDefault where the type of
authorizer is dependent on the deployment type, and instead always just
install the "dflt" (ie no-op0 authorizer if not specified, then I'd be
happy for it to have a deployment type of SERVER.
Dan
On 16 October 2012 21:56, Robert Matthews <rm...@nakedobjects.org>wrote:
> Dan
>
> Further to our conversation earlier, is there any reason that the Wicket
> viewer defaults to a prototype server (a specific Wicket type) where as any
> other webapp, such as Scimpi, defaults to server (one of the generic
> deployment types)?
>
> Rob
>