Thanks Igor,
I have seen that the Objects class provides a static setter in order to
use a different Implementation of IObjectStreamFactory instead of the
DefaultObjectStreamFactory.
Where would you recommend to place the code to set my own implementation
of IObjectStreamFactory using the
application init should be fine.
-igor
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 5:02 AM, A. Maza andr.m...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Igor,
I have seen that the Objects class provides a static setter in order to use
a different Implementation of IObjectStreamFactory instead of the
DefaultObjectStreamFactory.
just to circumvent the problem for a while, I am thinking of the
following workaround:
what would be the implications if I change the implementation of
IObjectStreamFactor.DefaultObjectStreamFactory so that
newObjectInputStream() and newObjectOutputStream return the regular JDK
that should most likely work without problems.
-igor
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Andreas Maza andr.m...@gmail.com wrote:
just to circumvent the problem for a while, I am thinking of the following
workaround:
what would be the implications if I change the implementation of
yes, except the fact that I am trying to use a Memcache-based
implementation of the IPageStore instead of the HTTPSessionStore (based
on the TerracottaPageStore. However, in my case the exception occurs
when I am trying to serialize the page using the provided method of the
AbstractPageStore.
Hi,
I've encountered now (and have seen reported by other users) several
different cases where Wicket on GAE throws an AccessControlException
when serializing an object to a byte array.
Although this is clearly an issue of GAE permissions, I would like to
ask if someone could give me a
I'm sure the answer is yes but to be sure: have you done everything
that is said here
http://stronglytypedblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/wicket-on-google-app-engine.html
?
Also, what versions of gae sdk and wicket are you using?
A. Maza escribió:
Hi,
I've encountered now (and have seen reported
