I'm dreaming, right?
- Original Message -
From:
Patrick
Lightbody
To: WebWork
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 10:52
PM
Subject: [OS-webwork] WebWork 2.0
Released
I'm pleased to announce the release of WebWork 2.0. You can
download
Please check this URL: http://www.opensymphony.com/webwork/views-jsp.jsp
Near the bottom the page renders wildly wrong on IE 6 and Mozilla Firebird
0.70.
Michael Day
---
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on
those jsp pages will be
html and will show up correctly.
On Feb 3, 2004, at 7:01 PM, Michael Blake Day wrote:
Please check this URL:
http://www.opensymphony.com/webwork/views-jsp.jsp
Near the bottom the page renders wildly wrong on IE 6 and Mozilla
Firebird
0.70.
Michael Day
Is this an issue with Webwork 1.4 as well?
Blake
- Original Message -
From: BOGAERT Mathias [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:06 AM
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Security flaw with WW2
FYI you can find information on how to do this for WebLogic 8.1
Disallowing POSTs with unknown referrers doesn't work at all. You can forge
the Referer header easily.
Blake
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Villela [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 8:32 AM
Subject: RES: [OS-webwork] Security flaw with WW2
, in the
past I've had to do the same with scripting languages such as PHP. I used
Apache's mod_rewrite module to accomplish my goal.
Thanks,
Michael Blake Day
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net
-webwork] creating custom URIs
Use the CoolUriServletDispatcher instead of the default
WebWorkServletDispatcher (in web.xml). Isn't that a cool feature?
--- Michael Blake Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi everyone!
What's the best method to avoid using a QUERY_STRING in URIs
Could we all get an update on the status of WebWork 2? I know we have
issues with the IoC stuff. Is that the only thing holding up the release?
Are the *Aware interfaces here to stay, or what?
I want to use WW2 on a project, but I'm at a standstill until these issues
are put to rest. I'd
Jason,
I think you should stick a copy of this on the wiki. It's a great overview
of WW2.
Blake
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Jason Carreira
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 11:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OS-webwork]
CVS conflicts in
src/java/com/opensymphony/webwork/views/velocity/WebWorkVelocityServlet.java
.
They prohibit compilation:
java:
[javac] Compiling 51 source files to
/usr/home/as/java/webwork2/build/java
[javac]
/usr/home/as/java/webwork2/src/java/com/opensymphony/webwork/views/velocity/
I've obviously missed something important here, but why exactly do people
need methods other than execute()? An Action should be composed of *one*
action, not multiple actions designated by method names.
Blake
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why remove the execute() method? That's the heart of the Command pattern.
If you're going to keep the interface (which I would prefer), you should
keep the one important element: the execute() method.
Blake
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
%20Resource%20Loaders
JPublish uses this facility to pull templates from any provider in its
Virtual File System and it works quite well.
Sincerely,
Anthony Eden
Michael Blake Day wrote:
How do you guys allow customers to modify velocity templates
without mucking
with WAR files?
Blake
Michael Blake Day wrote:
Right, but I've always been against sticking templates into a relational
database system, and I've never heard of any other good
alternative database
for document storage.
First of all I have to ask: why won't you store a template in a
relational database?
One
I am having a problem deploying my application with Orion. I think this is
because some properties files are staying loaded in memory. Each time I
deploy an EAR, Orion unpacks the EAR's contents into a directory with the
name of the EAR file (ex: app.ear is extracted to a directory named app).
The package element's extends property does not seem to inherit a
super-package's ancestors. Should it?
Right now, I have three packages: A, B, and C.
B extends A
C extends B
I would think that C inherits the interceptors, etc. from package A, but
that's not the case. To get that behavior, I
,
but I'm not sure where that is now...
Jason
-Original Message-
From: Michael Blake Day [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 11:12 AM
To: Webwork Mailing List
Subject: [OS-webwork] WW2: Themes/Skins/Whatever
How are skins going
which action to execute? Also, what if
you wanted more than one action to use success.jsp as the success page?
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios - e-commerce design, implementation and hosting
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mobile: 770.480.1547
-Original Message-
From
= Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
___
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
--
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios
mobile: 770.480.1547
Rickard,
This has been brought up before, I think, but I'm not sure it was answered
well enough. What about people that want to use XML, Velocity, Jasper
Reports, or some other view technology?
You are using JSP to include the actions, but how would you do that with
XML, for example?
Blake Day
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you all rename WebWork to XWork
because WebWork was a misnomer? If the framework remains web-centric, why
not just call it WebWork 1.4?
Blake Day
On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 03:29 AM, Rickard Öberg wrote:
This is a very difficult question
___
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
--
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios
mobile: 770.480.1547
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge
+1 here.
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios - e-commerce design, implementation and hosting
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mobile: 770.480.1547
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Jason Carreira
Sent: Thursday, January 02
I may be late to the conversation, but I just wanted to mention the obvious.
Having .action extensions does not expose the fact that a person is using
WebWork (or XWork). You can even change the extension to whatever you want
(try .dll, hehe).
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios - e-commerce
Can't we just add a path parameter to the action definitions in xwork.xml?
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios - e-commerce design, implementation and hosting
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mobile: 770.480.1547
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Write a script.
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios - e-commerce design, implementation and hosting
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mobile: 770.480.1547
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Hani Suleiman
Sent: Sunday
I agree that the API is terrible. Is anyone coming up with a better idea
for Xwork?
Blake
- Original Message -
From: Rickard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 4:39 AM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] PropertyEditor cache
Heng Sin Low wrote:
I
Why not just put Ant (v. whatever) in the README file as a requirement?
Most other OSS projects follow that convention for dependencies.
Michael Blake Day
Artistry Studios - e-commerce design, implementation and hosting
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mobile: 770.480.1547
Well, I'm not sure if my vote counts, but I'm certainly +1.
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Lightbody [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Property tag (beating the decomposed horse)
Oh, and everyone correct
29 matches
Mail list logo
