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=33711>. 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=33711 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-26 00:28 ------- I had a bit more of a look at this. Again, please be aware that I am new to this code base. The only mechanism I can see for an instance of SingleSignOn to be told that a WebApp has been undeployed is if it were to be told when the sessions related to that app were destroyed (i.e. if StandardManager.doUnload() were to be changed to call expire(true) instead of expire(false)). However, the listener SingleSignOn.sessionEvent(SessionEvent) assumes that it is only ever called for one of two reasons - either the user logged out, or the session expired. But what we have is a third case - one of the apps being undeployed. Now, it seems that if we can detect the third case then the method to be called has already been implemented (if not tested)... The method SingleSignOn.deregister(ssoId, session) [note the 2nd param] already exists and looks like it is designed for the job, but I can't find anything that calls it! So the question is: How does the listener method detect the third case? I can think of hacks involving overloading the expire(notify) method with an extra param and using that to put some marker in the data field of the SessionEvent, but I can't help but think I'm missing something obvious by not knowing the code base. Ideas? Kev -- 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]
