Re: Why the Registry is not available as a service?
For everyone that stumbles over this conversation. Here is the code I use
to access the registry outside of jetty. Basically its just about getting
the ServletContext object. If you have two or more WebAppContext you need
to inspect those, since I have only one I can go with the first one.
WebAppContext context = null;
for(Handler handler : jettyServer.getServer().getHandlers()) {
if(handler instanceof WebAppContext) {
context = (WebAppContext)handler;
break;
}
}
registry =
(Registry)context.getServletContext().getAttribute(TapestryFilter.REGISTRY_CONTEXT_NAME);
2013/10/19 Martin Kersten
> > Any comments why this is not available by default or did I missed the
> point here and its already in place? <
>
> Done so.
>
> Anyway It is setting a SerializationProvider static property at startup.
> Since I see that the use is only to provide a Token it just makes me think
> that there is a limitation to one instance only.
>
> Anyway. Thanks for the reply. I will try to start up two instances of it
> and check if it works out.
>
> The object locator would be enough. Where is it added as a service? I just
> don't saw the registry object becoming available.
>
>
> 2013/10/19 Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
>
> It is, not as the Registry service, but as the ObjectLocator service
>> (Registry extends ObjectLocator and ObjectLocator is the one that declares
>> the getService(), getObject() and autobuild() methods).
>>
>> Tapestry-IoC does *not* impose one Registry per JVM. Same for
>> Tapestry(-core). You can create as many Registry instances you want using
>> RegistryBuilder. Tapestry(-core) automatically creates one Registry per
>> web
>> application, but you can create as many as you want using RegistryBuilder.
>> For more information, read
>> http://tapestry.apache.org/starting-the-ioc-registry.html.
>>
>> By the way, it would be nice to ask how to do something instead of why x
>> doesn't exist, because sometimes it does exist, as that's the case with
>> both statements in the original message in the thread.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Martin Kersten <
>> martin.kersten...@gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > Hi there,
>> >
>> >I just wonder why the registry is not available as a service.
>> >
>> > Doing all those test writing I got used to handle the Registry directly.
>> > Since the Registry represents the IOC for me, I just wonder why it is
>> ment
>> > to that the registry can not directly be injected (or do I miss
>> something
>> > here).
>> >
>> > The only reference I found was that the Registry adds itself to the
>> > SerializationSupport. Which by checking the references looks like a
>> relict
>> > and should be removed from the code. It looks like that tapestry tries
>> to
>> > impose a single tapestry instance per JVM which seams to me like a
>> design
>> > flaw. (If you collect things to change for Tapestry 6 maybe one should
>> add
>> > that multiple instances of tapestry should be possible per JVM so no
>> more
>> > use of static references).
>> >
>> > So unitl I missed something, I just wonder why I can not do something
>> like:
>> >
>> > ServiceImpl(Registry){...}
>> >
>> > I can provide it easily by doing something like:
>> >
>> > binder.bind(RegisteryReference.class);
>> >
>> > ---
>> > registery.getService(RegisteryReference).setRegistery(registry);
>> >
>> > And then I inject the reference in my services. The reference uses a
>> weak
>> > link to ease gc on shutdown.
>> >
>> > (Or I just bind a registry wrapper that delegates the registry
>> interaction
>> > towards the real registry once it is created).
>> >
>> > Any comments why this is not available by default or did I missed the
>> point
>> > here and its already in place?
>> >
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Martin (Kersten),
>> > Germany
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thiago
>>
>
>
Re: Datatables warning when using
Will keep that in mind, thanks! Regards, Lidija On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Lance Java wrote: > Note that @Import can also be placed on render methods (eg setupRender) > instead of annotating at the class level. If used on a render method, the > import will only happen when the component is actually rendered. This might > be cleaner in this case. >
How to do a Batch transaction with Tapestry-Hibernate
I'm wondering how to do a batch transaction with Tapestry-Hibernate. Should I still be using @Inject Session session and @CommitAfter? or Should I be using Transaction tx? I'm flushing and clearing my session every 200 iterations, but it appears to progressively get slower and slower until I restart the job. Any thoughts on this? -- George Christman www.CarDaddy.com P.O. Box 735 Johnstown, New York
Re: How to make login to database virtual mutually exclusive per user
Hi, Check out stackoverflow.com. Am 23.10.2013 22:30 schrieb "Ken in Nashua" : > Hi Folks, > > I have a database. > > And I want all users to login... > > But I want all my code to cater to each user, regardless of how many are > logged in SAME CODE BASE... UNLIMITED USERS... CONCURRENCY... > CONTENTION...total mayhem > > I am worried about database collisions amongst the tables since they will > all need all the tables... or rows for themselves. > > Can I secure a virtual login by making their USER_ID the primary key to > every table in the database ? > > Is there a trick I can use with the sessionID? > > Just wondering if there is a tech sheet on the dos and donts about this > and ramifications of cluster safe too. > > Thanks for any tips, best practices or current trends on this topic. > > I hope this isnt the wrong forum. If it is I could use a friendly push to > the proper one... > > - cheers > > Ken >
Re: Embedding a file on a page using StreamResponse from another component.
Hi,
Thanks for the input, I really appreciate it. Unfortunately I do think
the files need saving as local files, for now at least. The reason
being that at the moment the project is really a prototype rather than
a fully blown system, but we do want it to be secure whilst we work.
The files may need to be easily directly editable on the server if
required and if it is all file based it also makes it easy to back up
for now.
I think I will save it along with the user object using onetime tokens
and see how well that works for now.
Thanks for your input, I really appreciate your help!
Steve
On 24 October 2013 17:37, mailingl...@j-b-s.de wrote:
> Hi Steve!
>
> Why not simply use the session? If the user has to authenticate anyway?
>
> In case you want avoid a session you can create onetime tokens. Unfortunately
> checking token validity or detecting outdated tokens requires persistence
> somehow...
>
> Jens
>
> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>
>> Am 24.10.2013 um 17:44 schrieb Steve :
>>
>> On a side note, both of my options (using the User object and using a
>> persisted field) will result in only being able to show one
>> StreamResponse at a time (otherwise they would both show the same). I
>> could extend this by having some kind of data structure (hashmap?) in
>> the User object and passing a token which is valid only to that user
>> as a parameter, but I think i'm so far off the mark.. there must be an
>> easier way.
>>
>>> On 24 October 2013 16:32, Steve wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think I am doing something very, very wrong. What I have currently
>>> works - but I get a feeling that it's not the best way of doing it.
>>> I'm hoping for a little bit of advice again (sorry to ask so many
>>> questions recently, and sorry this is a long one).
>>>
>>> This is the issue:
>>> I have some dynamic files with file paths which depend on the user.
>>> Previously, all of those files existed on the context which was bad
>>> news because it meant if a user knew the URL, they could download any
>>> file. Without going into S3 servers for now (I can't unfortunately as
>>> I have a monstrously huge pile of ethics forms to fill out if I want
>>> to do that), I want to be able to embed these files on the page for a
>>> user to see once they have logged in.
>>>
>>> My solution has been to create a page named "FileStreamResponse" which
>>> returns a StreamResponse from the onActivate method. I then can do the
>>> following from another page class to get a link to that file.
>>>
>>> @Inject ComponentResources resources;
>>> public Link getStaticFileLink() {
>>>return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
>>> }
>>>
>>> In the TML, I can use that link to embed it. This works for one file,
>>> which I have tested as "C:/file.xml" for now, but of course if anyone
>>> visits the link for /util/FileStreamResponse they get the same file.
>>> However, what I should be able to do is pass a parameter containing
>>> information about which file to show to the FileStreamResponse page.
>>>
>>> For my first attempt is to pass a parameter, I tried this:
>>> return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true,
>>> "C:/file.xml");
>>>
>>> This creates a link like this:
>>> http://localhost:8080/xyz/util/filestreamresponse/C:$002ffile.xml
>>>
>>> If I pick that up in the onActivate for the page it works.
>>>
>>> However, this isn't good because the the param is passed in the URL
>>> which again means anyone can view that link, unless I put a lot of
>>> permissions logic in that filestreamresponse class which already
>>> exists elsewhere then i'm a little stuck.
>>>
>>> So I know of one more solution to passing this parameter but it seems
>>> like a bit too much of a "hack" for even me.
>>> I create a setup method in the filestreamresponse page which takes in
>>> a filename and sets it. It persists the property. Then I just use the
>>> link to that page and it should show the correct file. Like this:
>>>
>>> @InjectPage
>>> private FileStreamResponse fsr;
>>> @Inject ComponentResources resources;
>>>
>>> public Link getStaticFileLink() {
>>>fsr.setup("C:/file.xml");
>>>return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
>>> }
>>>
>>> I believe that now the user cannot change that parameter so it should
>>> be safe. However, this doesn't seem right to me. It seems very.. very
>>> bad and i'm sure someone will tell me exactly that. Another option is
>>> to have the file which is requested stored in the User object which I
>>> have in the sessionstate but again I don't think that is a good way to
>>> do it.
>>>
>>> If I put the logic for testing permissions in to the page class, I
>>> still need to pass something to that page class to tell it which file
>>> to show, and i'd rather that not show in the URL.
>>>
>>> I'm sure others have had a similar problem and there is a standard way
>>> to do this which I am missing, I would really appreciate any guidance.
>>> Perhaps what I am doing
Re: Embedding a file on a page using StreamResponse from another component.
Hi Steve!
Why not simply use the session? If the user has to authenticate anyway?
In case you want avoid a session you can create onetime tokens. Unfortunately
checking token validity or detecting outdated tokens requires persistence
somehow...
Jens
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 24.10.2013 um 17:44 schrieb Steve :
>
> On a side note, both of my options (using the User object and using a
> persisted field) will result in only being able to show one
> StreamResponse at a time (otherwise they would both show the same). I
> could extend this by having some kind of data structure (hashmap?) in
> the User object and passing a token which is valid only to that user
> as a parameter, but I think i'm so far off the mark.. there must be an
> easier way.
>
>> On 24 October 2013 16:32, Steve wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think I am doing something very, very wrong. What I have currently
>> works - but I get a feeling that it's not the best way of doing it.
>> I'm hoping for a little bit of advice again (sorry to ask so many
>> questions recently, and sorry this is a long one).
>>
>> This is the issue:
>> I have some dynamic files with file paths which depend on the user.
>> Previously, all of those files existed on the context which was bad
>> news because it meant if a user knew the URL, they could download any
>> file. Without going into S3 servers for now (I can't unfortunately as
>> I have a monstrously huge pile of ethics forms to fill out if I want
>> to do that), I want to be able to embed these files on the page for a
>> user to see once they have logged in.
>>
>> My solution has been to create a page named "FileStreamResponse" which
>> returns a StreamResponse from the onActivate method. I then can do the
>> following from another page class to get a link to that file.
>>
>> @Inject ComponentResources resources;
>> public Link getStaticFileLink() {
>>return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
>> }
>>
>> In the TML, I can use that link to embed it. This works for one file,
>> which I have tested as "C:/file.xml" for now, but of course if anyone
>> visits the link for /util/FileStreamResponse they get the same file.
>> However, what I should be able to do is pass a parameter containing
>> information about which file to show to the FileStreamResponse page.
>>
>> For my first attempt is to pass a parameter, I tried this:
>> return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true,
>> "C:/file.xml");
>>
>> This creates a link like this:
>> http://localhost:8080/xyz/util/filestreamresponse/C:$002ffile.xml
>>
>> If I pick that up in the onActivate for the page it works.
>>
>> However, this isn't good because the the param is passed in the URL
>> which again means anyone can view that link, unless I put a lot of
>> permissions logic in that filestreamresponse class which already
>> exists elsewhere then i'm a little stuck.
>>
>> So I know of one more solution to passing this parameter but it seems
>> like a bit too much of a "hack" for even me.
>> I create a setup method in the filestreamresponse page which takes in
>> a filename and sets it. It persists the property. Then I just use the
>> link to that page and it should show the correct file. Like this:
>>
>> @InjectPage
>> private FileStreamResponse fsr;
>> @Inject ComponentResources resources;
>>
>> public Link getStaticFileLink() {
>>fsr.setup("C:/file.xml");
>>return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
>> }
>>
>> I believe that now the user cannot change that parameter so it should
>> be safe. However, this doesn't seem right to me. It seems very.. very
>> bad and i'm sure someone will tell me exactly that. Another option is
>> to have the file which is requested stored in the User object which I
>> have in the sessionstate but again I don't think that is a good way to
>> do it.
>>
>> If I put the logic for testing permissions in to the page class, I
>> still need to pass something to that page class to tell it which file
>> to show, and i'd rather that not show in the URL.
>>
>> I'm sure others have had a similar problem and there is a standard way
>> to do this which I am missing, I would really appreciate any guidance.
>> Perhaps what I am doing is perfectly OK, but I suspect not as it leads
>> to issues such as, even if the user logs out, if the value is
>> persisted then they would see that file if re-visiting the link.
>> (Unless it is indeed stored in the User object).
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Embedding a file on a page using StreamResponse from another component.
Can't you just check the user has permissions before serving the file? Throwing exception if they're not authorised. BTW using local files is usually a bad idea (portability, scalability, transactions etc). Have you considered storing in the db or a blobstore?
Re: Datatables warning when using
Note that @Import can also be placed on render methods (eg setupRender) instead of annotating at the class level. If used on a render method, the import will only happen when the component is actually rendered. This might be cleaner in this case.
Re: Embedding a file on a page using StreamResponse from another component.
On a side note, both of my options (using the User object and using a
persisted field) will result in only being able to show one
StreamResponse at a time (otherwise they would both show the same). I
could extend this by having some kind of data structure (hashmap?) in
the User object and passing a token which is valid only to that user
as a parameter, but I think i'm so far off the mark.. there must be an
easier way.
On 24 October 2013 16:32, Steve wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think I am doing something very, very wrong. What I have currently
> works - but I get a feeling that it's not the best way of doing it.
> I'm hoping for a little bit of advice again (sorry to ask so many
> questions recently, and sorry this is a long one).
>
> This is the issue:
> I have some dynamic files with file paths which depend on the user.
> Previously, all of those files existed on the context which was bad
> news because it meant if a user knew the URL, they could download any
> file. Without going into S3 servers for now (I can't unfortunately as
> I have a monstrously huge pile of ethics forms to fill out if I want
> to do that), I want to be able to embed these files on the page for a
> user to see once they have logged in.
>
> My solution has been to create a page named "FileStreamResponse" which
> returns a StreamResponse from the onActivate method. I then can do the
> following from another page class to get a link to that file.
>
> @Inject ComponentResources resources;
> public Link getStaticFileLink() {
> return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
> }
>
> In the TML, I can use that link to embed it. This works for one file,
> which I have tested as "C:/file.xml" for now, but of course if anyone
> visits the link for /util/FileStreamResponse they get the same file.
> However, what I should be able to do is pass a parameter containing
> information about which file to show to the FileStreamResponse page.
>
> For my first attempt is to pass a parameter, I tried this:
> return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true,
> "C:/file.xml");
>
> This creates a link like this:
> http://localhost:8080/xyz/util/filestreamresponse/C:$002ffile.xml
>
> If I pick that up in the onActivate for the page it works.
>
> However, this isn't good because the the param is passed in the URL
> which again means anyone can view that link, unless I put a lot of
> permissions logic in that filestreamresponse class which already
> exists elsewhere then i'm a little stuck.
>
> So I know of one more solution to passing this parameter but it seems
> like a bit too much of a "hack" for even me.
> I create a setup method in the filestreamresponse page which takes in
> a filename and sets it. It persists the property. Then I just use the
> link to that page and it should show the correct file. Like this:
>
> @InjectPage
> private FileStreamResponse fsr;
> @Inject ComponentResources resources;
>
> public Link getStaticFileLink() {
> fsr.setup("C:/file.xml");
> return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
> }
>
> I believe that now the user cannot change that parameter so it should
> be safe. However, this doesn't seem right to me. It seems very.. very
> bad and i'm sure someone will tell me exactly that. Another option is
> to have the file which is requested stored in the User object which I
> have in the sessionstate but again I don't think that is a good way to
> do it.
>
> If I put the logic for testing permissions in to the page class, I
> still need to pass something to that page class to tell it which file
> to show, and i'd rather that not show in the URL.
>
> I'm sure others have had a similar problem and there is a standard way
> to do this which I am missing, I would really appreciate any guidance.
> Perhaps what I am doing is perfectly OK, but I suspect not as it leads
> to issues such as, even if the user logs out, if the value is
> persisted then they would see that file if re-visiting the link.
> (Unless it is indeed stored in the User object).
>
>
> Thanks,
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Embedding a file on a page using StreamResponse from another component.
Hi,
I think I am doing something very, very wrong. What I have currently
works - but I get a feeling that it's not the best way of doing it.
I'm hoping for a little bit of advice again (sorry to ask so many
questions recently, and sorry this is a long one).
This is the issue:
I have some dynamic files with file paths which depend on the user.
Previously, all of those files existed on the context which was bad
news because it meant if a user knew the URL, they could download any
file. Without going into S3 servers for now (I can't unfortunately as
I have a monstrously huge pile of ethics forms to fill out if I want
to do that), I want to be able to embed these files on the page for a
user to see once they have logged in.
My solution has been to create a page named "FileStreamResponse" which
returns a StreamResponse from the onActivate method. I then can do the
following from another page class to get a link to that file.
@Inject ComponentResources resources;
public Link getStaticFileLink() {
return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
}
In the TML, I can use that link to embed it. This works for one file,
which I have tested as "C:/file.xml" for now, but of course if anyone
visits the link for /util/FileStreamResponse they get the same file.
However, what I should be able to do is pass a parameter containing
information about which file to show to the FileStreamResponse page.
For my first attempt is to pass a parameter, I tried this:
return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true, "C:/file.xml");
This creates a link like this:
http://localhost:8080/xyz/util/filestreamresponse/C:$002ffile.xml
If I pick that up in the onActivate for the page it works.
However, this isn't good because the the param is passed in the URL
which again means anyone can view that link, unless I put a lot of
permissions logic in that filestreamresponse class which already
exists elsewhere then i'm a little stuck.
So I know of one more solution to passing this parameter but it seems
like a bit too much of a "hack" for even me.
I create a setup method in the filestreamresponse page which takes in
a filename and sets it. It persists the property. Then I just use the
link to that page and it should show the correct file. Like this:
@InjectPage
private FileStreamResponse fsr;
@Inject ComponentResources resources;
public Link getStaticFileLink() {
fsr.setup("C:/file.xml");
return resources.createPageLink("util/FileStreamResponse", true);
}
I believe that now the user cannot change that parameter so it should
be safe. However, this doesn't seem right to me. It seems very.. very
bad and i'm sure someone will tell me exactly that. Another option is
to have the file which is requested stored in the User object which I
have in the sessionstate but again I don't think that is a good way to
do it.
If I put the logic for testing permissions in to the page class, I
still need to pass something to that page class to tell it which file
to show, and i'd rather that not show in the URL.
I'm sure others have had a similar problem and there is a standard way
to do this which I am missing, I would really appreciate any guidance.
Perhaps what I am doing is perfectly OK, but I suspect not as it leads
to issues such as, even if the user logs out, if the value is
persisted then they would see that file if re-visiting the link.
(Unless it is indeed stored in the User object).
Thanks,
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Datatables warning when using
I tried importJavaScriptLibrary and it is really done dynamically.
I did what you proposed:
@Inject @Path("context:js/jquery-ui-1.8.19.custom.min.js")
protected Asset jqueryUi;
@Inject @Path("context:js/TableTools.js")
protected Asset tableTools;
@Inject @Path("context:js/dataTables.editor.min.js")
protected Asset dataTablesEditorMin;
@Inject @Path("context:js/dataTables.editor.commons.js")
protected Asset dataTablesEditorCommons;
In Java code I'm then checking whether I have data for datatable or not. If
I have the data, I'm importing the libraries:
// import datatables and tabletools JS libraries
javaScriptSupport.importJavaScriptLibrary(jqueryUi);
javaScriptSupport.importJavaScriptLibrary(tableTools);
javaScriptSupport.importJavaScriptLibrary(dataTablesEditorMin);
javaScriptSupport.importJavaScriptLibrary(dataTablesEditorCommons);
It works perfectly :), thank you :).
Regards,
Lidija
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <
thiag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:14:43 -0200, Steve wrote:
>
> Hi Lidija,
>>
>
> Hi, guys!
>
>
> I had a similar question myself about conditionally including
>> libraries and I believe you can find the answer here:
>> http://tapestry.apache.org/**javascript.html
>>
>> If you scroll down (or ctrl +f) to "The importJavaScriptLibrary
>> method" - I think this may help you. It looks like the approach you
>> are using is also documented under "Approach 1: @Import".
>>
>
> @Import will always do the import. I you use
> JavaScriptSupport.**importJavaScriptLibrary(),
> you can do it dynamically. In addition, your problem may be solved by
> adding a test in the JavaScript code to check whether the table is actually
> there before applying the jQuery data table on it.
>
>
> Hope this helps, i'm new to Tapestry myself so please take what I say
>> with a pinch of salt, but the documentation seems to show how it can
>> be done (I believe you would just need an if statement in your page
>> class).
>>
>
> That's correct. :)
>
> --
> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> http://machina.com.br
>
>
> --**--**-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> users-unsubscribe@tapestry.**apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: How to make login to database virtual mutually exclusive per user
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013 18:30:05 -0200, Ken in Nashua wrote: Hi Folks, Hi! I am worried about database collisions amongst the tables since they will all need all the tables... or rows for themselves. As Jens said, this seems to be completely unrelated to Tapestry. I guess you need to learn more about SQL databases and transaction handling (both pessimistic and optimistic locking) and probably also how Hibernate and JPA deals with that. I hope this isnt the wrong forum. If it is I could use a friendly push to the proper one... This is the wrong forum. And this isn't even a forum! hehehe -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer http://machina.com.br - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5.4] AjaxFormLoop - is it working?
Ok, I've started fresh project and all is good I'll be offline for better part of the day, but I'll send the code when possible. Sorry for raising alarm Regards, Michal Sent from my mobile 24 paź 2013 09:22 "Peter Hvass" napisał(a): > Hi! > > > It's been working fine for us in a number of places on sites now running > 5.4. > > > Could you paste what you've got so far? A fresh set of eyes might be able > to > point out the issue immediately. > > > Thanks, > Peter > > - Original Message - > > From: "Michał Gruca" > To: "Tapestry users" > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 12:56:13 AM > Subject: [T5.4] AjaxFormLoop - is it working? > > Hi all, > I've been working to get AjaxFormLoop running for a while. The problem may > be between chair and keyboard, and I've failed on copy pasting. > > I need a simple table that allows to add and remove rows inside a form. I > hope for a simple version, as nothing fancy is necessary. > Actually first implementation by Taha is what would be a perfect case for > me: http://tawus.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/tapestry-ajaxformloop/ > However it does not work neither does jumpstart example with holders > > http://jumpstart.doublenegative.com.au/jumpstart/examples/ajax/formloopwithholders1 > > It looks like no events are being generated by add and remove links. If > anyone can confirm that would be good enough as at least I'd know that all > is okay with me ;) > > I've been testing on 5.4.21; 5.4.23 and I think that around 5.4.11 was > first time I postponed that feature due issues > > Many thanks and kind regards > Michal Gruca > >
Re: [T5.4] AjaxFormLoop - is it working?
Hi! It's been working fine for us in a number of places on sites now running 5.4. Could you paste what you've got so far? A fresh set of eyes might be able to point out the issue immediately. Thanks, Peter - Original Message - From: "Michał Gruca" To: "Tapestry users" Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 12:56:13 AM Subject: [T5.4] AjaxFormLoop - is it working? Hi all, I've been working to get AjaxFormLoop running for a while. The problem may be between chair and keyboard, and I've failed on copy pasting. I need a simple table that allows to add and remove rows inside a form. I hope for a simple version, as nothing fancy is necessary. Actually first implementation by Taha is what would be a perfect case for me: http://tawus.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/tapestry-ajaxformloop/ However it does not work neither does jumpstart example with holders http://jumpstart.doublenegative.com.au/jumpstart/examples/ajax/formloopwithholders1 It looks like no events are being generated by add and remove links. If anyone can confirm that would be good enough as at least I'd know that all is okay with me ;) I've been testing on 5.4.21; 5.4.23 and I think that around 5.4.11 was first time I postponed that feature due issues Many thanks and kind regards Michal Gruca
