On 8 Oct 2009, at 21:08, Felix Meschberger wrote:
ok, this is where the patch is upto (Map of Maps), I think the
ordering
may be the last problem, but I thought that several days ago.
I don't think that ordering is an issue if we are talking about map of
maps indexed by path segment - we
On 8 Oct 2009, at 21:06, Felix Meschberger wrote:
which ? the ones with servlet path collisions ?
yes, servlet path collision, I need to check that de-registration
really
works.
*but*
with 2 servlets registered to the same path I haven't worked out the
order in which they should be used,
Hi,
Ian Boston schrieb:
>
> On 8 Oct 2009, at 11:18, Felix Meschberger wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ian Boston schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>> I notice that ResourceProvidersEntries are sorted by the prefix that
>>> they use. (there is a TreeMap in ResourceProviderEntries for entries)
>>> I also notice that if th
Hi,
Ian Boston schrieb:
>
> On 8 Oct 2009, at 11:35, Felix Meschberger wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ian Boston schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>> While looking at making it possible to bind more than one
>>> ResourceProvider to a URL see [1], I noticed that the
>>> ResourceProviderEntry appeared to be a very active
On 8 Oct 2009, at 11:35, Felix Meschberger wrote:
Hi,
Ian Boston schrieb:
Hi,
While looking at making it possible to bind more than one
ResourceProvider to a URL see [1], I noticed that the
ResourceProviderEntry appeared to be a very active area of code
with a
lot of recursion, especially
On 8 Oct 2009, at 11:18, Felix Meschberger wrote:
Hi,
Ian Boston schrieb:
Hi,
I notice that ResourceProvidersEntries are sorted by the prefix that
they use. (there is a TreeMap in ResourceProviderEntries for entries)
I also notice that if they are not ordered in that way lots of things
start
Hi,
Ian Boston schrieb:
> Hi,
> While looking at making it possible to bind more than one
> ResourceProvider to a URL see [1], I noticed that the
> ResourceProviderEntry appeared to be a very active area of code with a
> lot of recursion, especially when you actually start to deploy a
> reasonabl
Hi,
Ian Boston schrieb:
> Hi,
> I notice that ResourceProvidersEntries are sorted by the prefix that
> they use. (there is a TreeMap in ResourceProviderEntries for entries)
> I also notice that if they are not ordered in that way lots of things
> start to break. This appears a bit fragile. I assum
> > IMHO the content structure is a critical part of the system
> (at least
> > on the technical side), so I would involve a developer with
> knowledge
> > and experience about the "underlying" repository and
> content modeling
> > whenever a new URL space is created by some application. Or
> teach
Hi,
I notice that ResourceProvidersEntries are sorted by the prefix that
they use. (there is a TreeMap in ResourceProviderEntries for entries)
I also notice that if they are not ordered in that way lots of things
start to break. This appears a bit fragile. I assume it relies on GET
and POST
Hi,
While looking at making it possible to bind more than one
ResourceProvider to a URL see [1], I noticed that the
ResourceProviderEntry appeared to be a very active area of code with a
lot of recursion, especially when you actually start to deploy a
reasonable number of servlets. This l
On 8 Oct 2009, at 09:24, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
IMHO the content structure is a critical part of the system (at least
on the technical side), so I would involve a developer with knowledge
and experience about the "underlying" repository and content modeling
whenever a new URL space is cre
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-1140?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Honwai Wong updated SLING-1140:
---
Description:
In case an errorhandler is triggered (e.g. 404 occurred), the Rewriter Filter
and thus
Rewriter Filter not called when error is handled
Key: SLING-1140
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-1140
Project: Sling
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Engine
Affects V
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:11, Ian Boston wrote:
> 1. The URL space is part of the UI and "owned" by the User, UX Designer, UI
> developer.
> 2. Imposing a convention on that URL space for the affordances of the back
> end causes just the problem that you are concerned about. Now the UI
> developer
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 00:24, John Norman wrote:
> Does it make any difference that different users might have a different
> logical tree for organising the same content? I have seen quite a few
> hierarchical information organisation models that make sense to one human
> being but are completely
On 7 Oct 2009, at 22:47, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 20:34, Ian Boston wrote:
I agree, I would like to adopt sensible naming, but we keep on
hitting
situations where even with the most reasonable domain prefix we end
up with
2K items in a folder and then the update
17 matches
Mail list logo
