Can a FormBeanConfig know it's ModuleConfig ?
Hello, I'm trying to setup a Spring - actionform integration, the same way DelegatingRequesprocessor can integration Spring with actions. I'm using a special FormBeanConfig that applies IoC after form-bean creation. It requires the current ModuleConfig . Is there a way to get it from a FormBeanConfig ? Nico. This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35703] - [tiles] TilesUtilImpl doInclude() should call TilesRequestProcessor doInclude()... but it doesn't
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35703. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35703 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-27 10:51 --- I actually did address Niall's concerns. On the contrary, current implementation of Tiles Plugin (until version 1.2.x of Struts) breaks the contract of the RequestProcessor - and this can be demonstrated pretty easily. The patch proposed is meant to fix that. Why does it break the contract of the RequestProcessor then would you ask ? Each application is able to implement its own RequestProcessor(s), as you know, to satisfy its own specific requirements (and I just happen to have one which implements its own doInclude() and doForward() methods to face some multi-portal requirements, hence this bug report :-(, otherwise I probably wouldn't even have noticed the issue). In the case of Struts without Tiles there's no problem at all, it all works fine. When it comes to Tiles (until version 1.2.x of Struts), i.e. integrating Tiles with Struts via Tiles Plugin, the application-specific TilesRequestProcessor implementation is actually bypassed. This is certainly fine when you have Tiles standalone but it is not when it comes to Struts+Tiles integration. As a matter of fact any application implementing its own TilesRequestProcessor subclass (with specific doForward() and doInclude() implementations) does not work any more with current Tiles Plugin (until version 1.2.x of Struts). That's why the fix has been made at 2 levels which you may note now cares not to impact Tiles standalone (TilesUtilImpl is left as is - Niall's was correct about my first patch being too radical) and which now impacts Tiles integration with Struts only : - TilesRequestProcessor now explicitly call parent's doInclude() (exactly in the same way that doForward() does) - TilesUtilStrutsImpl and TilesUtilStrutsModuleImpl now rely on TilesRequestProcessor doInclude() and doForward() N.B.: making the patch I actually noticed that the person who wrote TilesUtilStrutsModuleImpl in the first place actually realized this had to be done, just look at the class header comments and you'll find : Methods doForward() and doInclude() use their counterparts in the current RequestProcessor (todo) -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Validation Security Hole?
On 1/27/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the patch, can shorten the property name to Cancellable, with two l's (like NetBeans). +1 and rather than get would be better as is - i.e. isCancellable() Niall - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Validation Security Hole?
On 1/27/06, Paul Benedict [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I very much dislike changing the default behavior within a minor release or a milestone. But, if we can restrain the changes to the configuration, I suppose we could live with it. Ted, perhaps you need to think about this more :) Unless there are plans to come up with a different solution for 1.3/1.4, I don't want to put into Struts a solution that you're going to immediately rip out for a better approach. And I don't say that because I put time into the patch... ;-) but because it will create anguish for developers, and who wants to buy into a solution you're virtually about to toss away? If the set-property is the way to go, let's do it. And if you want it into the DTD instead, we can do that too. It's just modifying the DTD. +1/-1 for the DTD? Its not the case of tossing a solution away - attributes named in the DTD and set-property work in the same way. For example you could do the following action ... set-property property=validate value=true/ /action instead of action validate=true ... /action It just means that in 1.2 the DTD wouldn't support the cancellable attribute and in 1.3 it would and there would only be an additional change to 1.3 is to add the new attribute to the DTD - otherwise everything works the same. In any case, we should not just ignore the cancel token. If the token is present, and Cancellable is not set, then we should log the error and throw an exception so that the developer knows the contract is not being observed (or that the website is being spoofed). IMO, bad idea. What if you don't want to handle the cancel at all? That's how this whole thread started. The notion of canceling is semantically nonsensical for most actions that back a GET request (view airline ticket, view any item, etc.) The problem is not that the token is an intrinsic evil, but that the token is not always necessary. So you pass in a token of the CANCEL button and you're not handling it -- big deal. Whose to say that's incorrect behavior? It's only incorrect if the action is supposed to handle it but is not, and you need a requirements document for that ;-) I don't agree - if the request is passing in the CANCEL token and the action hasn't been marked as handling cancel it means one of two things: 1) Programmer error - they've added a cancel button, but not marked the action 2) Invalid Request - someones trying to spoof the cancel behaviour to avoid validation. Both of which are errors and IMO I agree with Ted - we should throw an exception. It is my understanding that Exceptions are heavy-lifting, relatively speaking, compared to a normal non-exception execution path. Don't you think, devilishly speaking, it would be a great idea to write a loop that passes in the CANCEL token knowing the server will generate an exception every time? Unless I am overly scrupulous, I'd say that lays the foundation of a DoS attack, eating up alot of CPU to churn exceptions. I don't think it makes much difference either way - any kind of loop which repeatedly calls an action could be the foundation of a DoS attack - whether the server throws an exception for this - or successfully executes an action. In this scenario its bad news - exception or not. Niall Paul - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Validation Security Hole?
On 1/27/06, Paul Benedict [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Niall,
Okay. I understand now I now prefer throwing an exception because it
stops a corner case which
I haven't mentioned yet. I was going to ask if we should also remove the
CANCEL_KEY from the
request attribute if cancelling is disabled, but the Exception won't even let
it pass.
So I guess this is the docket:
* Rename validateCancelable to cancellable. Kudos for Ted for catching it
since our
DispatchActions use cancelled() with two L's
* Throw an Exception in processValidate() if the html.CANCEL token is
present. But what Exception
should be thrown, just an Exception, a RuntimeException, or a subclass of
Exception
(InvalidCancelRequestException)?? I prefer a subclass so that the exception
block can handle
this unique case, otherwise you can't do it declaratively.
Currently the struts exception handling only works for exceptions
thrown in the Action's exceute method. So if we just throw an
exception in processValidate() then it should be either a
ServletException or an IOException - which are the only two that the
process() method of RequestProcessor declares. However IMO it would be
good if this exception or exceptions thrown in the ActionForm's
validate method were also able to be handled by the struts exception
handling as well (I'm sure this has come up in the past). So my
preference would be to do as you suggest - throw a
InvalidCancelRequestException - and also change the process() method
to use the exception handler:
try {
if (!processValidate(request, response, form, mapping) {
return;
}
} catch (Exception e) {
ActionForward forward = processException(request, response, e,
form, mapping);
processForwardConfig(request, response, forward);
return;
}
However, maybe doing this is too much of a change and we should stick
to just resolving the issue at hand (and throw a ServletException).
Would be good to hear other opnions on this before going ahead with
this approach.
Niall
I'll work on it tonight. I just need a roadmap. Thanks guys.
Paul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
On 1/27/06, Nicolas De Loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm using html:javascript to build the static javascript validation : %@ page contentType=text/javascript session=false % % response.setHeader(Cache-Control,post-check=900,pre-check=3600); % %@ taglib prefix=html uri=http://struts.apache.org/tags-html; % html:javascript cdata=false htmlComment=false dynamicJavascript=false staticJavascript=true/ If I use tags-html-el, The tag perform a form validation search and I get : WARN [org.apache.commons.validator.ValidatorResources](439) Form 'null' not found for locale 'fr' Seems there is a bug in html-el ELJavascriptValidatorTag Are you sure that its only the EL version - the code that produces this is all in the original version (and EL version inherits) and looks to me like both should produce this warning. It looks pretty minor to me (just a warning in the logs), but feel free to open a bug ticket for it if you like. Niall Nico. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38420] New: - Clay cuts off first character of files
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38420.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38420
Summary: Clay cuts off first character of files
Product: Struts
Version: Nightly Build
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Shale
AssignedTo: dev@struts.apache.org
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have the clay definition:
component jsfid=commonPageLayout extends=clay
attributes
set name=clayJsfid value=/templates/common.html /
/attributes
symbols
set name=@title value=#{labels.map['default.title']} /
set name=@headercontent value=/templates/common/header.html /
set name=@leftcontent value=/templates/common/left.html /
set name=@bodycontent value=space /
set name=@footercontent value=/templates/common/footer.html /
/symbols
/component
For testing, in left.html and footer.html I just have simple one liners like
This is the footer. It can be found in /templates/footer.html The first
letter in This is being chopped off so it's displayed as his is the
footer... The only one this doesn't happen on is the header.html which has
img jsfid=image That is displayed totally fine. And if I wrap the
text of left.html and footer.html in a p it works as expected.
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38421] New: - Symbol attributes only work as all lower-case
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38421.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38421
Summary: Symbol attributes only work as all lower-case
Product: Struts
Version: Nightly Build
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Shale
AssignedTo: dev@struts.apache.org
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have the clay definition:
component jsfid=commonPageLayout extends=clay
attributes
set name=clayJsfid value=/templates/common.html /
/attributes
symbols
set name=@title value=#{labels.map['default.title']} /
set name=@headercontent value=/templates/common/header.html /
set name=@leftcontent value=/templates/common/left.html /
set name=@bodycontent value=space /
set name=@footercontent value=/templates/common/footer.html /
/symbols
/component
If I try and change the names of the symbols @headercontent, @leftcontent,
@bodycontent, and @footercontent so that some letter in them is capitalized
(I've tried headerContent, heaDercontent, heaDerContent, and other variations to
make sure there's nothing special going on), and go through and change the usage
of them _everywhere_ then defining a page that overrides those settings doesn't
work. So normally I might have something like
html jsfid=commonPageLayout
bodycontent=/testtemplatingbody.html
leftcontent=/templates/blank.html
allowBody=false
headtitleMock Header/title/head
bodyThe entire document is replaced by the layout./body
/html
And that works great. But if I change all the symbol names to have a capital C,
Clay seems to ignore the settings in the page definition and just use the
default values for commonPageLayout.
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38422] New: - avascriptValidatorTag may not search for Form is formname is null
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38422. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38422 Summary: avascriptValidatorTag may not search for Form is formname is null Product: Struts Version: 1.2.8 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: trivial Priority: P2 Component: Unknown AssignedTo: dev@struts.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] When html:javascript is used to build static javascript, validator WARNs for Form 'null' not found for locale 'fr' As formName is not set (only staticJavascript is expected) form-bean may not be searched. Please replace Form form = resources.getForm(locale, formName); by Form form = null; if (formName != null) form = resources.getForm(locale, formName) -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
Sorry, I didn't read my logs well ! EL and Non EL have same behaviour... I'd like Validator to generate the Static Javascript, without the script elements But if I don't set a formName attribute I get this warning in my logs. Form should be searched ONLY if formName has been set. I've added a trivial issue for that : http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38422 Nico. Niall Pemberton a écrit : On 1/27/06, Nicolas De Loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm using html:javascript to build the static javascript validation : %@ page contentType=text/javascript session=false % % response.setHeader(Cache-Control,post-check=900,pre-check=3600); % %@ taglib prefix=html uri=http://struts.apache.org/tags-html; % html:javascript cdata=false htmlComment=false dynamicJavascript=false staticJavascript=true/ If I use tags-html-el, The tag perform a form validation search and I get : WARN [org.apache.commons.validator.ValidatorResources](439) Form 'null' not found for locale 'fr' Seems there is a bug in html-el ELJavascriptValidatorTag Are you sure that its only the EL version - the code that produces this is all in the original version (and EL version inherits) and looks to me like both should produce this warning. It looks pretty minor to me (just a warning in the logs), but feel free to open a bug ticket for it if you like. Niall Nico. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
On 1/27/06, Nicolas De Loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, I didn't read my logs well ! EL and Non EL have same behaviour... OK good, thats what I expected after looking at the code. I'd like Validator to generate the Static Javascript, without the script elements Can I ask why you want this? You may be interested in a recent change I made to Commons Validator - it now creates a copy of all the static scripts in one file and also a compressed version of the same. Should be available when Validator 1.2.1 is released. But if I don't set a formName attribute I get this warning in my logs. Form should be searched ONLY if formName has been set. I've added a trivial issue for that : http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38422 OK thanks. Niall Nico. Niall Pemberton a �crit : On 1/27/06, Nicolas De Loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm using html:javascript to build the static javascript validation : %@ page contentType=text/javascript session=false % % response.setHeader(Cache-Control,post-check=900,pre-check=3600); % %@ taglib prefix=html uri=http://struts.apache.org/tags-html; % html:javascript cdata=false htmlComment=false dynamicJavascript=false staticJavascript=true/ If I use tags-html-el, The tag perform a form validation search and I get : WARN [org.apache.commons.validator.ValidatorResources](439) Form 'null' not found for locale 'fr' Seems there is a bug in html-el ELJavascriptValidatorTag Are you sure that its only the EL version - the code that produces this is all in the original version (and EL version inherits) and looks to me like both should produce this warning. It looks pretty minor to me (just a warning in the logs), but feel free to open a bug ticket for it if you like. Niall Nico. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
Can I ask why you want this? You may be interested in a recent changeI made to Commons Validator - it now creates a copy of all the staticscripts in one file and also a compressed version of the same.Should be available when Validator 1.2.1 is released. Can you explain me this new functionality ? I want to put validator javascript in a browser-cacheable file, but don't want a static .js file, so that any change in validator is applied. I've set a JSP for this /script/validator.jsp : %@ page contentType=text/javascript session=false % % response.setHeader(Cache-Control,post-check=900,pre-check=3600);% %@ taglib prefix=html uri=http://struts.apache.org/tags-html; % html:javascript cdata=false htmlComment=false dynamicJavascript=false staticJavascript=true/ Using this, Ive both cached JS file and validator generated javascript methods. This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35703] - [tiles] TilesUtilImpl doInclude() should call TilesRequestProcessor doInclude()... but it doesn't
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35703. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35703 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-27 17:39 --- (In reply to comment #12) Why does it break the contract of the RequestProcessor then would you ask ? When it comes to Tiles (until version 1.2.x of Struts), i.e. integrating Tiles with Struts via Tiles Plugin, the application-specific TilesRequestProcessor implementation is actually bypassed. You mean your TilesRequestProcessor.doInclude() is not called? And this is because TilesRequestProcessor does not override doInclude()? If that's the case I do not have a problem with modifying TilesRequestProcessor to override doInclude() and call super.doInclude(). But I still don't like the idea of a class calling a RequestProcessor hook directly. As Niall said before, those hooks are meant to be invoked in a chain by RequestProcessor, not individually by other components. It would be my preference if TilesRequestProcessor's doInclude() called a method in TilesUtil that could be overriden by application developers instead of TilesUtil calling TilesRequestProcessor.doInclude(). -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38420] - Clay cuts off first character of files
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38420. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38420 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-27 17:39 --- The html parser was truncating characters in a document ending in plain text. Fix for this is in *todays* nightly builds 20060127. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38421] - Symbol attributes only work as all lower-case
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38421. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38421 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-27 17:42 --- The symbols were not treating case insensitivity in a consistent way. Fix is in the 20060127 nightly builds. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
On 1/27/06, Nicolas De Loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I ask why you want this? You may be interested in a recent changeI made to Commons Validator - it now creates a copy of all the staticscripts in one file and also a compressed version of the same.Should be available when Validator 1.2.1 is released. Can you explain me this new functionality ? Just all the static javascript in a single .js file - either in compressed or uncompressed format. The aim is to provide a file that can be cached by the browser. I want to put validator javascript in a browser-cacheable file, but don't want a static .js file, so that any change in validator is applied. For the static scripts they will only change with new versions of validator. I've set a JSP for this /script/validator.jsp : %@ page contentType=text/javascript session=false % % response.setHeader(Cache-Control,post-check=900,pre-check=3600);% %@ taglib prefix=html uri=http://struts.apache.org/tags-html; % html:javascript cdata=false htmlComment=false dynamicJavascript=false staticJavascript=true/ Using this, Ive both cached JS file and validator generated javascript methods. I must be mis-understaning something somewhere - this looks like your using this to cache on the server side only - including the above in your page - rather than on the browser side? Niall - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
I must be mis-understaning something somewhere - this looks like your using this to cache on the server side only - including the above in your page - rather than on the browser side? Niall I include a cache-control HTTP header so that the browser can cache the file. Having static javascript in a single .JS file will be great, but how do we have to include it in the webapp ? If this is part of commons-validator.jar I'll have to manually extract it and add it to my webbapp ! Notice I'm using maven, so commons-validator is automatically added to my weapp. I just have a property to change to upgrade to a newer version. This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
display tag link busted
On this page: http://struts.apache.org/struts-action/userGuide/preface.html#resources The display tag link is this: http://http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/ -Dave - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35703] - [tiles] TilesUtilImpl doInclude() should call TilesRequestProcessor doInclude()... but it doesn't
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35703. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35703 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-27 18:04 --- (In reply to comment #7) Agree with Niall's comments on updating the patch. I finally add some time to work on it (sorry for the delay). My comment #5 was this should be closed as WONTFIX or INVALID! (In reply to comment #13) I agree with what Greg has said in comment #11 and comment #13. As Greg said, perhaps we could modify the RequestProcessor to call TilesUtil (haven't looked at the code recently). The question though is is it worth it? From what I see all it would do is save you having to duplicate your custom code in two places - that doesn't seem too much of a hardship to me. With the plan to develop standalone tiles which should replace this its probably not worth the effort IMO and we should just close this as WONTFIX. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38349] - [site] Broken Links
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38349. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38349 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-27 18:11 --- Reported by David Durham ddurham -at- vailsys.com: On this page: http://struts.apache.org/struts-action/userGuide/preface.html#resources The display tag link is this: http://http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/ -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: display tag link busted
On 1/27/06, David Durham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On this page: http://struts.apache.org/struts-action/userGuide/preface.html#resources The display tag link is this: http://http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/ I added this to Bug 38349: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38349 Thanks, -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bug in html-el
On 1/27/06, Nicolas De Loof [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I must be mis-understaning something somewhere - this looks like your using this to cache on the server side only - including the above in your page - rather than on the browser side? Niall I include a cache-control HTTP header so that the browser can cache the file. Having static javascript in a single .JS file will be great, but how do we have to include it in the webapp ? If this is part of commons-validator.jar I'll have to manually extract it and add it to my webbapp ! Notice I'm using maven, so commons-validator is automatically added to my weapp. I just have a property to change to upgrade to a newer version. Its not going to be in the jar - it'll be in the binary distro alongside the jar, so as well as commons-validator-1.2.1.jar there will also be: commons-validator-1.2.1.js commons-validator-1.2.1-compress.js Currently the maven build of commons validator creates these scripts, but its not available in the nightly build which uses the ant build script. Niall - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r372918 - /struts/action/trunk/xdocs/userGuide/preface.xml
Author: martinc Date: Fri Jan 27 09:15:29 2006 New Revision: 372918 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=372918view=rev Log: Fix broken link to the display taglib. Modified: struts/action/trunk/xdocs/userGuide/preface.xml Modified: struts/action/trunk/xdocs/userGuide/preface.xml URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/struts/action/trunk/xdocs/userGuide/preface.xml?rev=372918r1=372917r2=372918view=diff == --- struts/action/trunk/xdocs/userGuide/preface.xml (original) +++ struts/action/trunk/xdocs/userGuide/preface.xml Fri Jan 27 09:15:29 2006 @@ -1345,7 +1345,7 @@ a href=http://struts.application-servers.com;Struts Layout/a , and -a href=http://http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/; +a href=http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/; Display Tags/a . /p - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: display tag link busted
Fixed in SVN. Site not updated, though. -- Martin Cooper On 1/27/06, David Durham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On this page: http://struts.apache.org/struts-action/userGuide/preface.html#resources The display tag link is this: http://http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/ -Dave - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38294] - FactoryFinder.releaseFactories() only one renderkit instance
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38294. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38294 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Help adding Struts to AJAX impl
Hello fellow developers, I am new to your list. I have enjoyed using Struts for about 3 years now. I have searched the dev archive concerning my current task and I am not sure how to word my query. I am coming up with a lot of results labeled as a commit to your code base. I have an AJAX implementation at http://www.xoscript.org/ and I want to build support for Struts into the API. In a nutshell I need to find a factory class in Struts that will allow me to obtain the current configuration so that I can allow my users to pass an appropriate ActionMapping at runtime. Below is the basic layout of the process. For more details about how xoscript works visit the getting started and how it works links from the site above. A UerDefinedClass calls a UerDefinedActionClass.execute passing request and response obtained from the AJAX API. The user will also need to pass an ActionMapping and an ActionForm to the execute method. I am trying to find a way to get to this line in ActionServlet but I can not violate the getServletContext from one servlet to another. The over all concern is that I am trying to keep my OutputStream from the response formatted in a certain way and I can not just forward the request to the ActionServlet. ModuleUtils.getInstance().selectModule(request, getServletContext()); ModuleConfig config = getModuleConfig(request); Any help would be greatly appreciated. Bryan LaPlante - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: svn commit: r372715 - /struts/shale/trunk/build/test-framework/project.xml
Wendy, With m2 wouldn't you just give this a scope of test? Sean On 1/26/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/26/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can see why these two have to be declared, since the Shale code directly depends on them. But HtmlUnit itself ships with a bunch of other jars that it requires at runtime. Do these have to be declared also, or are they picked up transitively from whatever the htmlunit pom entry says? As you noted, I just added enough to get the test framework classes to compile. Maven 1 doesn't have transitive dependencies, so anyone who is using HtmlUnit would have to declare it and all of its dependencies in his own project.xml file. (The Maven 2 pom will list HtmlUnit as an optional dependency, which will prevent it from being transitive. Again, the user would declare it if he wants it, at which point m2's transitive dependency mechanism would kick in.) -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: svn commit: r372715 - /struts/shale/trunk/build/test-framework/project.xml
On 1/27/06, Sean Schofield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wendy, With m2 wouldn't you just give this a scope of test? It's a matter of viewpoint ... when you are compiling the test framework itself, these things are compile time dependencies :-). Sean Craig
svn commit: r373031 - /struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
Author: craigmcc
Date: Fri Jan 27 15:35:14 2006
New Revision: 373031
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=373031view=rev
Log:
Promote the mapResourceId() method from protected to public scope, since it
is generally useful. No functional change -- the big diff is because the
method was moved in the source file.
Modified:
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
Modified:
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java?rev=373031r1=373030r2=373031view=diff
==
---
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
(original)
+++
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
Fri Jan 27 15:35:14 2006
@@ -157,39 +157,8 @@
link(context, resourceId);
}
-// --- Protected
Methods
-/**
- * pMark the specified resource identifier as having already been
- * linked in the current request./p
- *
- * @param context codeFacesContext/code for the current request
- * @param resourceId Resource identifier to mark as having been linked
- */
-protected void link(FacesContext context, String resourceId) {
-
-context.getExternalContext().getRequestMap().
-put(PREFIX + resourceId, Boolean.TRUE);
-
-}
-
-
-/**
- * pReturn codetrue/code if the specified resource identifier has
- * already been linked in the current request, and should therefore not
- * be linked again./p
- *
- * @param context codeFacesContext/code for the current request
- * @param resourceId Resource identifier to check for prior linking
- */
-protected boolean linked(FacesContext context, String resourceId) {
-
-return context.getExternalContext().getRequestMap().
-containsKey(PREFIX + resourceId);
-
-}
-
/**
* pMap the specified resource identifier to a request URL, taking into
@@ -205,8 +174,8 @@
* @exception IllegalStateException if a configuration error prevents
* the mapping of this resource identifier to a corresponding URI
*/
-protected String mapResourceId(FacesContext context, Mechanism mechanism,
- String resourceId) {
+public String mapResourceId(FacesContext context, Mechanism mechanism,
+String resourceId) {
// Validate our incoming parameters
if (resourceId == null) {
@@ -255,6 +224,40 @@
// Ask this Mapping to map the resource identifier appropriately
return mapping.mapResourceId(context, resourceId);
+
+}
+
+
+// --- Protected
Methods
+
+
+/**
+ * pMark the specified resource identifier as having already been
+ * linked in the current request./p
+ *
+ * @param context codeFacesContext/code for the current request
+ * @param resourceId Resource identifier to mark as having been linked
+ */
+protected void link(FacesContext context, String resourceId) {
+
+context.getExternalContext().getRequestMap().
+put(PREFIX + resourceId, Boolean.TRUE);
+
+}
+
+
+/**
+ * pReturn codetrue/code if the specified resource identifier has
+ * already been linked in the current request, and should therefore not
+ * be linked again./p
+ *
+ * @param context codeFacesContext/code for the current request
+ * @param resourceId Resource identifier to check for prior linking
+ */
+protected boolean linked(FacesContext context, String resourceId) {
+
+return context.getExternalContext().getRequestMap().
+containsKey(PREFIX + resourceId);
}
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r373053 - /struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/impl/MethodBindingProcessor.java
Author: craigmcc
Date: Fri Jan 27 16:53:46 2006
New Revision: 373053
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=373053view=rev
Log:
Correctly set the logging level of a debugging message.
Modified:
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/impl/MethodBindingProcessor.java
Modified:
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/impl/MethodBindingProcessor.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/impl/MethodBindingProcessor.java?rev=373053r1=373052r2=373053view=diff
==
---
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/impl/MethodBindingProcessor.java
(original)
+++
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/impl/MethodBindingProcessor.java
Fri Jan 27 16:53:46 2006
@@ -66,8 +66,8 @@
// Create and execute a method binding based on this resource
identifier
MethodBinding mb = mapResourceId(context, resourceId);
-if (log().isInfoEnabled()) {
-log().info(Translated resource id ' + resourceId +
+if (log().isDebugEnabled()) {
+log().debug(Translated resource id ' + resourceId +
' to method binding expression ' +
mb.getExpressionString() + ');
}
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38374] - Automatic Validation always bypassed with CANCEL_PROPERTY
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38374. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38374 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #17498|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-28 06:53 --- Created an attachment (id=17523) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17523action=view) Patch for Struts 1.2.x branch This patch further expands upon the discussion on the boards: [1] The validateCancelable property of the action mapping is renamed to cancellable; but I have left the method to be named getCancellable (not isCancellable) since the only other boolean property is getValidate (not isValidate). [2] An UnsupportedCancellationException is thrown if the action mapping receives the Globals.CANCEL_KEY but it is not cancellable. This is considered a programmer error or a hack/spoof. [3] The UnsupportedCancellationException can be declaratively handled in an exception block. I strongly believe the programmer should be able to configure behavior based on this error. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38374] - Automatic Validation always bypassed with CANCEL_PROPERTY
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38374. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-28 06:54 --- Created an attachment (id=17524) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17524action=view) UnsupportedCancellationException.java -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38374] - Validation always skipped with Globals.CANCEL_KEY
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38374. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38374 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Automatic Validation always |Validation always skipped |bypassed with |with Globals.CANCEL_KEY |CANCEL_PROPERTY | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-28 06:58 --- Renamed summary. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
svn commit: r373090 - /struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
Author: craigmcc
Date: Fri Jan 27 22:28:45 2006
New Revision: 373090
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=373090view=rev
Log:
When utilized by a component inside a tool at design time, it is likely that
the initialization normally performed on the first request to our phase listener
will not have been performed. Therefore, make mapResourceId() simply return
the incoming resource identifier unchanged, since it will not actually be
used anyway.
Modified:
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
Modified:
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java?rev=373090r1=373089r2=373090view=diff
==
---
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
(original)
+++
struts/shale/trunk/core-library/src/java/org/apache/shale/remoting/XhtmlHelper.java
Fri Jan 27 22:28:45 2006
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
package org.apache.shale.remoting;
+import java.beans.Beans;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Iterator;
@@ -185,6 +186,14 @@
if (mechanism == null) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException
(resourceBundle(context).getString(xhtml.noMechanism));
+}
+
+// If we are running inside a design time tool, the runtime
+// initialization might not have been performed. Therefore,
+// just return the incoming resource identifier unchanged, sinc
+// it is not going to be executed anyway.
+if (Beans.isDesignTime()) {
+return resourceId;
}
// Acquire a reference to the Mappings instance for this application
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
