>From: "Craig McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On 5/23/07, Gary VanMatre wrote:
> >
> > >From: Torsten Krah [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >The question would be - as the second run is really useless - how to
> > >identify annotated tiger beans.
> > >If they can be identified (dont know if this is possible and how to do
> > >it yet), than the code in run two can be fixed to do what the comment
> > >does want to do, remove them, instead of removing the rest completely.
> > >
> >
> > I'm thinking that we could just remove that bit of logic because the
> > web container should fire the ServletRequestListener [1] regardless?
> >
>
> It will indeed get called later, but outside the JSF lifecycle ...
> which means you would not be able to get to the FacesContext in a
> destroy() method. That's why this logic was inserted in the first
> place.
>
Ah, I figured there was good reason. What if we delegated to the tiger
LifecycleListener from the JSF phase listener - same pattern?
// Delegate to the Tiger Extensions instance if it exists
LifecycleListener tiger = tiger();
if (tiger != null) {
tiger.contextDestroyed(event);
}
private LifecycleListener tiger() ...
> Craig
>
Gary
> > However, there might be a funky case that resulted in this logic in the
> > PhaseListener - not sure.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/shale/framework/trunk/shale-view/src/main/java/org/
>
> apache/shale/view/faces/LifecycleListener.java?view=markup
> >
> >
> > >Torsten
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Torsten Krah
> > To: user@shale.apache.org
> > Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 19:11:48 +0000
> > Subject: Re: SHALE-409 fix
> > The question would be - as the second run is really useless - how to
> > identify annotated tiger beans.
> > If they can be identified (dont know if this is possible and how to do
> > it yet), than the code in run two can be fixed to do what the comment
> > does want to do, remove them, instead of removing the rest completely.
> >
> > Torsten
> >
> >
> > Am Dienstag, den 22.05.2007, 15:41 +0200 schrieb
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> > > Please fix the bug SHALE-409.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Mario Buonopane
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have
> > received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the
> > original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.
> >
> >
> >
