[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-4531?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17648053#comment-17648053
]
Werner Punz edited comment on MYFACES-4531 at 12/15/22 1:35 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
The double include itself is a server side problem... What I see here is by
pressing addedviaInclude in the tck, that a resource response is issued a
second time.
And per spec it basically should be appended.
So ever time we press add via include, another resource response is issued:
I can fix this from my side by simply checking whether the same element exists
(I did that probably already in the new code)
but in the end the question is, should the resource response even be issued for
this case to begin with?
I will add the block code for the resources, it only can happen there anyway.
But I just wonder whether this really is a client side issue here.
I will open a new bug for this one.
Will close issue bug since it is done!
was (Author: werpu):
The double include itself is a server side problem... What I see here is by
pressing addedviaInclude in the tck, that a resource response is issued a
second time.
And per spec it basically should be appended.
So ever time we press add via include, another resource response is issued:
I can fix this from my side by simply checking whether the same element exists
(I did that probably already in the new code)
but in the end the question is, should the resource response even be issued for
this case to begin with?
I will add the block code for the resources, it only can happen there anyway.
But I just wonder whether this really is a client side issue here.
> Backport the nonce and head fixes into the 2.3 codebase
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MYFACES-4531
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-4531
> Project: MyFaces Core
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 2.3.10
> Reporter: Werner Punz
> Assignee: Werner Punz
> Priority: Major
>
> We have had fixes in the nonce area and the head replacement area due to some
> failing tck tests. The original plan was to get those fixes in via auto sync.
> We probably have to step back a little bit.
> A major change is not wanted anymore in the 2.3 codebase so I will try to
> backport the fixes.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
