>From: "Craig McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On 5/23/07, Gary VanMatre wrote:
> > >From: "Craig McClanahan"
> > >
> > > 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() ...
> >
>
> At first blush this looks good, but I'm heads down getting ready for a
> trip to India next week, so I won't be able to actually play with this
> until the first week of June.
>
Cool. I'll try to take a look this week. I don't have a Solaris box
sitting around to test but I could make the change to the 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT
and we could decide if we want to push it to the other branch later on.
> Craig
>
Gary
> >
> >
> > > 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.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
