SecurityGroup Entity with
> different permissions using .xml.
> I want to create a unique group Id for each module with different
> permissions.
> I tried the below code but it's not working, only securityPermission is
> working.
> I'm sharing an example below for you to look over.
&
Hello Community,
I was trying to insert data into SecurityGroup Entity using a
SecurityPermissionSeedData.xml file.
I found the group Id = "Super" in the SecurityGroup Entity, the same way I
want to create my own multiple group Ids in the SecurityGroup Entity with
different permissions
One way of doing that is to have a structure like
One
permission="XERUS_ASSETMAINTENANCE"
action="_VIEW"/>
two
Thanks for the response Gil, But I was asking for applying multiple
conditions as mentioned below
Hello Mahi,
You can find multiple examples in the code base looking for :
``
One of :
service-name="workEffortGenericPermission" main-action="VIEW"/>
location="component://workeffort/template/task/MyTasks.ftl"/>
Hello Community,
I want to add .ftl files in screens.xml for multiple users based on a few
conditions if there are multiple users named production user and quality
user and other users, so for this users if I want to give permission for
viewing any .ftl files, how can I do it.
*for instance*, if
Hi Ryan,
Maybe just a simple find + grep would do the trick.
On Mar 31, 2017 2:24 AM, "Ryan Moriarty" <ryan.moria...@ableengineering.com>
wrote:
I've been asked to do a review of user permissions in our OFBiz
installation. Is there any good method (besides searching through t
Heck, I'd appreciate a table to that effect within the wiki.
Just saying.
On 17-03-30 04:23 PM, Ryan Moriarty wrote:
I've been asked to do a review of user permissions in our OFBiz
installation. Is there any good method (besides searching through the code
base one-by-one) of determining
I've been asked to do a review of user permissions in our OFBiz
installation. Is there any good method (besides searching through the code
base one-by-one) of determining what services and screens a user has access
to, given a certain SecurityPermission? Perhaps XPath queries against
service
temporarily adjusted
the default permissions on Jira. This means that those of you who are in the
default Jira users group will not be able to create or comment on Jira
issues. People with ICLA's filed and are in the Contributors or Committers
groups wont have any problems. The infra team are working
Hi Everyone
I'm posting this to both user and dev mailing lists.
The ASF had a big spam attack on Jira yesterday so have temporarily
adjusted the default permissions on Jira. This means that those of you
who are in the default Jira users group will not be able to create or
comment on Jira
service definition to look like
service name=learningCallingServiceOneWithPermission engine=java
location=org.ofbiz.learning.learning.LearningServices
invoke=callingServiceOne
descriptionFirst Service Called From The
Controller/description
required-permissions join-type
-permissions join-type=OR
check-role-member role-type=CUSTOMER/
/required-permissions
implements service=learningInterface/
/service
In ModelPermission.java I also commented out
partyRoles = EntityUtil.filterByDate(partyRoles);
which is now on line
/description
required-permissions join-type=OR
check-role-member role-type=CUSTOMER/
/required-permissions
implements service=learningInterface/
/service
In ModelPermission.java I also commented out
partyRoles = EntityUtil.filterByDate(partyRoles
changed my service definition to look like
service name=learningCallingServiceOneWithPermission engine=java
location=org.ofbiz.learning.learning.LearningServices
invoke=callingServiceOne
descriptionFirst Service Called From The Controller/description
required-permissions join
and annoying because of it.
:) I am sure I pay for my sins in other ways... :p
Will let you know how I get on.
On 18 June 2015 at 05:42, Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
wrote:
Le 16/06/2015 13:49, Brad Smith a écrit :
My bad, the question should rather be, is two-part permissions approach
for my sins in other ways... :p
Will let you know how I get on.
On 18 June 2015 at 05:42, Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
wrote:
Le 16/06/2015 13:49, Brad Smith a écrit :
My bad, the question should rather be, is two-part permissions approach
deprecated?
Actually
...@les7arts.com
wrote:
Le 16/06/2015 13:49, Brad Smith a écrit :
My bad, the question should rather be, is two-part permissions approach
deprecated?
Actually no, it's still usable, look for check-permission at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Mini+Language+-+minilang
Le 16/06/2015 13:49, Brad Smith a écrit :
My bad, the question should rather be, is two-part permissions approach
deprecated?
Actually no, it's still usable, look for check-permission at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Mini+Language+-+minilang+-+simple-method+-+Reference
Hi Gabrielle,
The Party mgr is the application to use, when it comes to managing user
data, including access permissions if you're not providing a self
registration or self service mechanism.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM http://www.orrtiz.com*
Services Solutions for Cloud-
Based
Also https://localhost:8443/webtools/control/security
On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 16:33 +0200, Pierre Smits wrote:
Hi Gabrielle,
The Party mgr is the application to use, when it comes to managing user
data, including access permissions if you're not providing a self
registration or self service
Hello,
I would like to create new users within Webtools. Ideally, they can login and
have access to specific areas (CMS editor) only.
Is this possible to create new users? So far, I cannot seem to find a way to do
so. If so, is it possible to give these users access permissions?
Any
Hi Gabrielle,
please have a look at the Party Manager, where you can add new users,
logins, set their security groups and permissions etc.
See http://demo-stable-ofbiz.apache.org/partymgr
Regards,
Michael Brohl
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de
Am 17.06.15 um 16:00 schrieb Gabrielle C. Nguyen
Hi all,
I am currently running through Apache OFBiz Development: The Beginner's
Tutorial by Howell and Wong.
I have my dev environment setup in IntelliJ and so far the examples have
all more-or-less worked. I am up to Chapter 11, Permissions and the Service
Engine and have hit some issues
My bad, the question should rather be, is two-part permissions approach
deprecated?
On 16 June 2015 at 13:43, Brad Smith wheninf...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I am currently running through Apache OFBiz Development: The Beginner's
Tutorial by Howell and Wong.
I have my dev environment setup
is that i have to do to access the application if user have any of the
permissions above?
/
SecurityGroupPermission groupId=CONFIG permissionId=SMART_CONFIG/
SecurityGroupPermission groupId=LOCATION permissionId=SMART_LOCATION/
what is that i have to do to access the application if user have any of the
permissions above?
--
Raghu Chandra K R
Lead Engineer NPI (New Product Initiative)
Ph
element 'webapp'.
In your case, the permissions to be included are:
- OFBTOOLS_ADMIN or OFBTOOLS_VIEW
and
- SMART_ADMIN or SMART_VIEW
You might find useful the following short tutorial
http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/apache-ofbiz-blog/ofbiz-tutorial-how-to-setup-permission-for-a-new-user-to-access
Hi Jad,
Yes, expiring the permission in stead of removing it is the expected
behaviour. Permissions assignments, like many other objects, have a limited
lifespan.
The reason for expiring in stead of a hard delete has to do with
accountability and the business need to be able to audit actions
Hi Pierre,
Thanks a lot for answering.
At least now we know it's not a bug or any unexpected behavior...
Thanks,
-
Jad El Omeiri
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/removing-user-permissions-tp4661241p4661376.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list
was wondering whether that was changed on purpose and whether from now on
that was the expected behavior. Does anyone have any idea about this?
Thanks,
-
Jad El Omeiri
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/removing-user-permissions-tp4661241.html
Sent from the OFBiz
(with permissions set to ORDERMGR_ADMIN), then define a
search
on the CustRequest search form before I get the error message in the logs
when the result list is rendered.
Also strange: When I try to change my password I get thrown out from the
PartyMgr screen as having no permission.
Even more
still running with this (I can only do that part-time in my
evenings). Here is more findings (but still no solution):
The error message is legged when in methodContext there is no userId set.
Now I wonder how that can happen, as I am logging into the ordermgr
application (with permissions set
Further to this, I do see this error message on the logs for almost every
screen I open on the backend apps:
Service auth failed for userLoginId [admin] because UserLogin record
currentPassword fields did not match; note that the UserLogin object passed
into a service may need to have the
message is legged when in methodContext there is no userId set.
Now I wonder how that can happen, as I am logging into the ordermgr
application (with permissions set to ORDERMGR_ADMIN), then define a search
on the CustRequest search form before I get the error message in the logs
when the result list
You can do a trick to handle this:
Its genericContentPermission service which executes, when you use
/content/control/stream?contentId. So you write SECA rule in your component on
service genericContentPermission:
Rule should be: When ever genericContentPermission runs, your new custom
Hi
Can anybody give me a short answer on how to give view permission to an
anonymous/guest user to view content. I am using
/content/control/stream?contentId in an FTL to show images but it only
displays when I log onto the ContentMgr application on the back end.
Thanks in advance.
in
the default accounts page.
I want to keep the find screen but only the sfa admin should be able to see
it .
can anyone please help me how to do that?
I have only basic information about permissions and services with
permissions
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com
permissions and services with
permissions
--
View this message in context:
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Permissions-tp2991515p2991569.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
https://cwiki.apache.org/OFBTECH/ofbiz-security.html
also check Role limited (or based) permissions
and the notes at the end of the document.
=
BJ Freeman
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52
Yes, a patch could be contributed. Just verify before that you are using the right xsd version and that it's has not been already
fixed.
Jacques
From: Rene Scheibe rene.sche...@tngtech.com
We are using nested 'required-permissions' elements in our service
definitions to implement
We are using nested 'required-permissions' elements in our service
definitions to implement AND OR joining. See below:
required-permissions join-type=OR
check-permission permission=SOME_PERMISSION action=_UPDATE/
required-permissions join-type=AND
permission-service service-name
as a couple of days ago there was a new implementation of security that
I have not got familiar with, in the trunk.
before that changes the permission is based on login and the permissions
in the service and UI components.
each of what you say is available.
Also we have a portal that is keyed
select
product from it. Am I doing the right thing? Also, I have to add in
PARTYMGR_VIEW permissin so that there are things to show in any party Id
pop-up windows. Why is MYPORTAL_CUSTOMER security group not defined to have
the necessary permissions for it to be useful?
Ofbiz version: 9.04 (2010
that there are things to show in any party Id
pop-up windows. Why is MYPORTAL_CUSTOMER security group not defined to have
the necessary permissions for it to be useful?
Ofbiz version: 9.04 (2010-02-17)
--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive rates
I will try. Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Insufficient-Permissions-for-MYPORTAL-CUSTOMER-tp1563975p1564011.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
:)
If I can accomplish this out of the box by creating a security group, I will
be happy to do so. Could someone simply provide steps for me to follow?
Thanks again for all your help!
Kind Regards,
Deedra
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/Setting-product-admin-permissions
Hi Deedra:
Just a quick note about Security Groups:
OOTB they work to control access to website locations as defined by
URLs. So, when a login attempt occurs or when a user attempts to access
a URL for a given webapp, OFBiz will check to see if the user has the
proper Security Group
This page may be helpful to have a beginning of an idea (it gives some
pointers) on how roles and permissions are used together in
OFBiz to achieve what David is talking about
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+security
HTH
Jacques
From: David E Jones d...@me.com
I
or a bug.
Regards,
Ruth
David E Jones wrote:
I think Deedra is talking about product administration and not about access to
products in the ecommerce store.
There is actually some functionality to give more limited permissions to certain users. Instead of giving a user the full create,
update
, I
would be more than happy to verify and document the process and then
post it to the Wiki.
Regards,
Ruth
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
This page may be helpful to have a beginning of an idea (it gives some
pointers) on how roles and permissions are used together in
OFBiz to achieve what David
it to the Wiki.
Regards,
Ruth
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
This page may be helpful to have a beginning of an idea (it gives some
pointers) on how roles and permissions are used together
in
OFBiz to achieve what David is talking about
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+security
of an idea (it gives
some pointers) on how roles and permissions are used together
in
OFBiz to achieve what David is talking about
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+security
HTH
Jacques
From: David E Jones d...@me.com
I think Deedra is talking about product administration
than happy to verify and
document the process and then post it to the Wiki.
Regards,
Ruth
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
This page may be helpful to have a beginning of an idea (it gives
some pointers) on how roles and permissions are used together
in
OFBiz to achieve what David is talking about
http
steps' or documentation to use as a guide, I
thought perhaps someone reading this post could help out??
I have created a store, catalog, products...and would like to now assign
specific permissions accordingly. I do not want all my ADMINs to have the
same full access to a catalog. As a matter
permissions accordingly. I do not want all my ADMINs to have the
same full access to a catalog. As a matter of fact, I would like to create
a 'Product Admin' allowing that person/group to simply Add, Edit, and Delete
products in a specific store catalog. Is this a standard feature in OFBiz
that I am just
the more 'front end' setup activities. Not
finding very many 'exact steps' or documentation to use as a guide, I
thought perhaps someone reading this post could help out??
I have created a store, catalog, products...and would like to now
assign
specific permissions accordingly. I do not want all my
...and would like to now
assign
specific permissions accordingly. I do not want all my ADMINs to
have the
same full access to a catalog. As a matter of fact, I would like to
create
a 'Product Admin' allowing that person/group to simply Add, Edit,
and Delete
products in a specific store catalog
a store, catalog, products...and would like to now assign
specific permissions accordingly. I do not want all my ADMINs to have the
same full access to a catalog. As a matter of fact, I would like to create
a 'Product Admin' allowing that person/group to simply Add, Edit, and Delete
products
like to now assign
specific permissions accordingly. I do not want all my ADMINs to have the
same full access to a catalog. As a matter of fact, I would like to create
a 'Product Admin' allowing that person/group to simply Add, Edit, and Delete
products in a specific store catalog
I think Deedra is talking about product administration and not about access to
products in the ecommerce store.
There is actually some functionality to give more limited permissions to
certain users. Instead of giving a user the full create, update and delete
permissions for the catalog
access to
products in the ecommerce store.
There is actually some functionality to give more limited permissions to certain users. Instead of
giving a user the full create, update and delete permissions for the catalog manager give them the
role limited permissions. Then (as a different user
to give more limited permissions
to certain users. Instead of giving a user the full create, update
and delete permissions for the catalog manager give them the role
limited permissions. Then (as a different user that has permission
to do so) associate them with a catalog in a certain role
.nabble.com/Permissions-for-services-called-by-the-user-in-the-frontend-tp965460p965460.html
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Rishi,
I wonder if Mario is no looking for a dynamically way to give permissions
to each new registered user.
Did you intend to answer to this question ?
Mario,
If it was your question and you don't find Rishi's answer a solution I
guess you have simply to use an ECA which will fires and give
kind of
help actually a subscriber needs.
Thanks Again !
Rishi Solanki
Enterprise Software Developer
HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd.
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Jacques Le Roux
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com wrote:
Hi Rishi,
I wonder if Mario is no looking for a dynamically way to give permissions
Hi Rishi,
I wonder if Mario is no looking for a dynamically way to give permissions to
each new registered user.
Did you intend to answer to this question ?
Mario,
If it was your question and you don't find Rishi's answer a solution I guess you have simply to use an ECA which will fires
Hi all,
I want that the new registered users have always some permissions. How can I
do that without the admin has to set one by one in the party application?
Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://n4.nabble.com/How-to-set-permissions-to-all-new-users-tp948378p948378.html
Software Developer
HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:19 PM, MarioF oceanoart...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I want that the new registered users have always some permissions. How can
I
do that without the admin has to set one by one in the party application?
Thanks in advance
equivalent to admin/ofbiz.
- Search for the party for which the permissions are need to be assigned
- Goto the Party profile screen and look at the Username section on the
rightside
- Click on the SecurityGroups
- In the 'Add UserLogin to the SecurityGroup' sreen, choose FULLADMIN
Hi
I am having problems with updating ledgers when web users pay for goods.
I sure the problem is configuration but I don't know where. All help
greatly appreciated.
Also, I'm not clear on how new users are assigned the ACCTG_ATX
permissions.
Alan
The log message is
2009-05-17 19:51:17,700
Hi
We are running V4.0
Alan
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 13:39 -0700, BJ Freeman wrote:
what version of ofbiz are you using
Trunk (version #)
release 9.04
Release 4.0
Alan sent the following on 4/29/2009 1:23 PM:
Hi
I am having trouble with security and permissions on a webapp. My
This may help, http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+security
but beware some changes are going on in this area
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2380
Jacques
From: Alan ahal...@mercatx.co.uk
Hi
I am having trouble with security and permissions on a webapp. My
understanding
what version of ofbiz are you using
Trunk (version #)
release 9.04
Release 4.0
Alan sent the following on 4/29/2009 1:23 PM:
Hi
I am having trouble with security and permissions on a webapp. My
understanding is that I have to associate new customers with permissions
to make ledger entries
Hi
We use the webapp but at the end of each sale we get the following error
message.
I suspect I have a configuration error somewhere to do with permissions
being allocated to new customers but don't know where.
Any help would be appreciated.
Alan Halley
2009-04-21 13:05:16,751 (TP
I have created a new user with ORDER_ENTRYALL profile. And when I tried to
login with it to ordermanager it told me:
The Following Errors Occurred:
Login for this application couldn't be completed (required permissions
missing).
However, if I restart ofbiz then it logins with no problem. So
Take a look at the cache.properties file. You'll see that permissions
take up to 1/2 hour to take effect if a previous setting (including no
permission) has been cached.
-David
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:20 AM, masionas wrote:
I have created a new user with ORDER_ENTRYALL profile. And when
Thank you, David. That does the trick I think.
David E Jones-3 wrote:
Take a look at the cache.properties file. You'll see that permissions
take up to 1/2 hour to take effect if a previous setting (including no
permission) has been cached.
-David
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:20 AM
, PRODUCTION.
I set this groups role as ADMIN
In this group, there is a user called Jay, with the security group PROD_1
I have created a security group called PROD_1 with the security group
permissions:
MANUFACTURING_ADMIN ALL operations in the Manufacturing Manager.
I have checked the ofbiz
Milind,
I did not look into details but don't you think these informations should not
be better in Wiki ?
Like http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/UBE
Then I'd suggest to create a hat page for tutorials...
Thanks
Jacques
From: Milind W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you! Jacques. Feedback and the quicker
Thank you! Jacques. Feedback and the quicker path to learn, is all I am
looking for.
David there was no intention to offend and hope none was taken.
BJ Thanks for answering my questions patiently and looking at my files.
Here is a tutorial I have written for login.
not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in
OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of
the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events
-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security
(chains
ofbiz4.0.
I don't think I follow the reason with OFBTOOLS base
persmission
not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I
From: BJ Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have heard others say how they benefited from the videos, and others
that say they did not.
I can not attest either way.
Again the ones that did not, are not here now, the ones that did are
still part of the community and contributing.
my main contribution
with OFBTOOLS base
persmission
not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in
OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the
list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
controller
using
ofbiz4.0.
I don't think I follow the reason with OFBTOOLS base persmission
not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems
-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request
using
ofbiz4.0.
I don't think I follow the reason with OFBTOOLS base persmission
not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more
in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run
of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security
(chains
exempt) --
!-- event type=java
path=org.ofbiz.webapp.event.TestEvent
invoke=test
is to assume no permission until one of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security
(chains
exempt) --
!-- event type=java
path
of the list
of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security
(chains
exempt) --
!-- event type=java
path=org.ofbiz.webapp.event.TestEvent
invoke=test
-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request
to my controller using
ofbiz4.0.
I don't think I follow the reason with OFBTOOLS base persmission not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more
.
I don't think I follow the reason with OFBTOOLS base persmission not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can
-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security (chains
exempt) --
!-- event type=java path
.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security (chains
exempt
the reason with OFBTOOLS base persmission not
taking effect in the ofbiz-component as explained in OFBIZ-829.
But I agree with Si Chen on OFBIZ-829
The right way is to assume no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all
no permission until one of the list of
permissions is met. Seems more intitutive.
For now I can workaround it so thanks all.
-Milind
preprocessor
!-- Events to run on every request before security (chains
exempt) --
!-- event type=java
path=org.ofbiz.webapp.event.TestEvent
invoke=test
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
