ation,
-b
-Original Message-----
From: Brian Topping
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 3:20 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: PropertyUtils.copyProperties() usage in 1.1-b2
Craig, Rana,
thanks for your responses, hoping you guys can provide some input:
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:craigmcc@;apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 1:14 PM
> To: Struts Developers List
> Subject: RE: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
>
> I'm not open to modifying fundamental behavior like this in
> 1.x, even w
t;wizards")
>
>
> You could argue that the way DynaActionForms work is how
> they're supposed
> to, so it's not a bug ;-).
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Brian Topping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Strut
ot;)
>
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/status.html
>
> David
>
>
>
> >From: "Brian Topping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAI
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martin.cooper@;tumbleweed.com]
> Subject: RE: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
>
> The "outrageous effort"? Just automate it, and it becomes trivial.
How? Curious how you manage the problem...
It's compile-time automation
so this couldn't be changed
> before 2.0 if at
> all.
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Brian Topping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Struts Developers
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martin.cooper@;tumbleweed.com]
> Subject: RE: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
>
> You have to decide where you want to be bitten. ;-) Yes, you
> may end up
> writing a bunch of hidden fields. But if you don't, then
> you're f
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:craigmcc@;apache.org]
> Subject: RE: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
>
> The missing link for a multi-page form is some way to tie
> which page got
> submitted to the set of properties that live on that page
> (and ther
If the documentation is vague, you can create a patch and post it to
> bugzilla. I will apply any valid documentation patch ASAP.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Brian Topping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Struts D
> -Original Message-
> From: Ted Husted [mailto:husted@;apache.org]
> Subject: Re: RE: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
>
> Checkboxes on a session-scoped form is really the only reason we
> have a reset() in the first place. When the box is clear, the
> browser's don't send b
Greetings all,
I'm trying to get my head out of the sand with regard to use of
DynaActionForms whose contents persist across multiple action invocations. I
guess this is commonly called the "wizard" case. I'm hoping you guys can
shed some light on my damage WRT this issue (I'll manage the other
about getting
a 1.2 branch so we can get started on this properly? I'm worried about
getting on 1.2 because the release cycle seems to be an annual event, living
with CVS for a year seems like a rough road, but the sooner the better.
best regards,
-b
> -Original Message-
>
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> This is an interesting idea. I see a pretty serious
> potential gotcha --
> Struts performs a validating parse of the struts-config.xml
> file, and this
> is required (as of recent nightly builds) because we rely on
> some default
> v
Hi all,
I'm working on a servlet that was subclassed from ActionServlet 1.0, and
trying to port it to 1.1. I have most of the ActionServlet subclass
reformulated as a subclass of RequestProcessor with the goal that the
ActionServlet would not be impacted by the addition of this code. In
essenc
14 matches
Mail list logo
