Re: [Catalyst] catalyst tutorial: MyAppDB/Book.pm vs. MyApp/Model/Book.pm

mla ha scritto: Marcello Romani wrote: In MyApp/Model I usually have only MyAppDB.pm, which role is to expose the DBIC::Schema classes under MyAppDB/ as a catalyst model. This doesn't mean however that I would never create anything else. If all I need is one dbic schema, then the answer to

Re: [Catalyst] getting $c in model unit test

Nathan Gray wrote: On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 03:32:31PM +0100, Matt Lawrence wrote: Nathan Gray wrote: I would like to test a model with a unit test. Catalyst kindly generates stub unit tests for models, but it does not include a stub showing how to instantiate the context object.

[Catalyst] Too greedy name-based Virtual Host

Hello, I'm still in trouble with virtual hosts... We have a domain domain.tld with several machines. On one of them, apache can be called using http://site1.domain.tld. It is configured to listen to port 80 with Listen *:80. Now we would like to bind our Catalyst app on

Re: [Catalyst] Too greedy name-based Virtual Host

Am 16.05.2007 um 11:54 schrieb Xavier Robin: VirtualHost site2.domain.tld:80 ServerNamesite2.domain.tld:80 DocumentRoot /home/xrobin/MIAPE/root LogLevel debug ErrorLog /home/xrobin/catalyst_error_log Location / SetHandler

Re: [Catalyst] $c-uri_for with proxy (heavy loaded projects).

Oleg Pronin wrote: Does anyone can advice a good solution ? Read: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Catalyst-Runtime/lib/Catalyst.pm#PROXY_SUPPORT -Brian ___ List: Catalyst@lists.rawmode.org Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst

[Catalyst] $c-uri_for with proxy (heavy loaded projects).

Greetings. Imagine: Variant #1 - simple BROWSER http://site.com - Apache(80). uri_for is http://site.com Variant #2 - simple proxing BROWSER http://site.com - nginx/oops (80) - Apache(81). uri_for is http://site.com:81 ! Variant #3 - complex proxing BROWSER http://site.com - nginx (80) -

Re: [Catalyst] Too greedy name-based Virtual Host

On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 11:54:34AM +0200, Xavier Robin wrote: Here comes the Virtual Host : VirtualHost site2.domain.tld:80 ServerNamesite2.domain.tld:80 DocumentRoot /home/xrobin/MIAPE/root LogLevel debug ErrorLog /home/xrobin/catalyst_error_log

Re: [Catalyst] Too greedy name-based Virtual Host

This works, and http://site2.domain.tld calls our Catalyst application, and it seems to work properly. But strangely enough, our application is now bound also on site1.domain.tld ! (so all the usual pages are not reachable anymore). Have you setup another VirtualHost for site.domain.tld?

Re: [Catalyst] Re: Persistent login

there's no especially sane way to extend the session cookie on a per- user basis that i have found. here is a hack that i am experimenting with: if ($c-login($username, $password)) { $c-session-{remember_me} = $c-req-params-{remember_me}; # ... } and in package MyApp.pm (or a plugin

Re: [Catalyst] $c-uri_for with proxy (heavy loaded projects).

Thanks a lot ! 2007/5/16, Brian Cassidy [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Oleg Pronin wrote: Does anyone can advice a good solution ? Read: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Catalyst-Runtime/lib/Catalyst.pm#PROXY_SUPPORT -Brian ___ List: Catalyst@lists.rawmode.org

RE: [Catalyst] Form validation in insert() and update()?

Chris Laco wrote: Off Topic. Making a note for myself and DBIC::Validation 100 can be validated because we have %colinfo {size = 100} Patterns could be covered in validation_profiles at the source level...but maybe this would be nice as well: { type = 'VARCHAR', size = 100,

RE: [Catalyst] Form validation in insert() and update()?

--- Jason Gottshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Laco wrote: Off Topic. Making a note for myself and DBIC::Validation 100 can be validated because we have %colinfo {size = 100} Patterns could be covered in validation_profiles at the source level...but maybe this would be nice as

Re: [Catalyst] Form validation in insert() and update()?

Jason Gottshall wrote: This gets at precisely the issue I've been wrestling with lately. Validation constraints at all levels (db, model, controller, form, etc.) seem to sort themselves into two general categories: field-specific questions (Is it required/unique?, Does it match a given pattern?,