Sylvain Wallez dijo: > Antonio Gallardo wrote: > >>Sylvain Wallez dijo: >> >> >>>Antonio Gallardo wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hi: >>>> >>>>The lastest changes in treeprocessor broke the xsp-action. The problem >>>> is in method setup() in o.a.c.generation.ServerPagesGenerator.java this >>>> class needs a SourceResolver. >>>> >>>> >>>Ooops,sorry! It should be fixed now. Please cross-check! >>> >>> >> >>Hi Sylvain: >> >>Thanks for the fix. It works now. >> >> > > BTW, can you explain how you use xsp-action?
This is an old application that uses XSP and Actions. We have there just 1 action that interact with the auth-fw to allow autorisation of a given resources. How to use an xsp-action? Here is an example I posted before: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=105328971325422&w=2 for more info: > Do you need xsp taglibs in an action or is it just a convenient way to write small custom actions without writing a java class? We just need 1 xsp taglib: xmlns:action="http://apache.org/cocoon/action/1.0"; Of course this is a convient way write actions without writing a java class. ******************************************* In newer applications, we choosed to not use actions at all. It was a design decision. We do all using flow, even for simple checks as you suggested. The authentication-fw is used with flows and woody. > I'm asking because I several times encountered the need for some very > small app-specific code to be called as part of a pipeline that > otherwise don't need all the bells and whistles of a flowscript call, > and I'm still thinking a flow-action may be a very usefull addition, > i.e. an action that allows to call a flowscript function (and access the > global scope) but doesn't require to end with a sendPage or > sendPageAndWait. flow-actions? some people requested this before. I remember people angry because under the newer flow concept we don't allow a map:call flow without a sendpage() inside. I am not sure. I think everything can be done using flow. In that way I don't see flow-actions as something useful. Also sitemaps are cleaner without calling to much actions and branching inside. Of course this is my point of view. If some one else need it, go ahead. It is up to the users to choose what they need. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo.
