Or reimplementing them. regards,
Martin On 1/5/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In case of of not sending by end of jan; I am +1 on doing a "undo" on these extensions. JM2C -M On 1/5/07, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Nikolay, > > your ICLA seems not to have been recorded still - can you take care of > sending the fax (if you have send it and it hasn't arrived, can you > send it to me as well?), it's blocking our release as of now. > > Thanks, regards, > > Martin > > On 1/5/07, Paul Spencer (JIRA) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1411?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12462475 ] > > > > Paul Spencer commented on MYFACES-1411: > > --------------------------------------- > > > > Where are we on getting the ICLA? > > > > Paul Spencer > > > > > Lifecycle phase executions repetitions > > > -------------------------------------- > > > > > > Key: MYFACES-1411 > > > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1411 > > > Project: MyFaces Core > > > Issue Type: Improvement > > > Components: JSR-127 > > > Affects Versions: 1.1.4 > > > Reporter: Nikolay Petrov > > > Assigned To: Martin Marinschek > > > Fix For: 1.1.5-SNAPSHOT > > > > > > Attachments: ApplyRequestValuesExecutor.java, InvokeApplicationExecutor.java, LifecycleImpl.java, PhaseExecutor.java, ProcessValidationsExecutor.java, RenderResponseExecutor.java, RestoreViewExecutor.java, UpdateModelValuesExecutor.java > > > > > > > > > Every phase in LifecycleImpl looks like: > > > private boolean applyRequestValues(FacesContext facesContext, PhaseListenerManager phaseListenerMgr) > > > throws FacesException > > > { > > > boolean skipFurtherProcessing = false; > > > if (log.isTraceEnabled()) log.trace("entering applyRequestValues in " + LifecycleImpl.class.getName()); > > > try { > > > phaseListenerMgr.informPhaseListenersBefore(PhaseId.APPLY_REQUEST_VALUES); > > > if(isResponseComplete(facesContext, "applyRequestValues", true)) > > > { > > > // have to return right away > > > return true; > > > } > > > if(shouldRenderResponse(facesContext, "applyRequestValues", true)) > > > { > > > skipFurtherProcessing = true; > > > } > > > facesContext.getViewRoot().processDecodes(facesContext); > > > } finally { > > > phaseListenerMgr.informPhaseListenersAfter(PhaseId.APPLY_REQUEST_VALUES); > > > } > > > if (isResponseComplete(facesContext, "applyRequestValues", false) > > > || shouldRenderResponse(facesContext, "applyRequestValues", false)) > > > { > > > // since this phase is completed we don't need to return right away even if the response is completed > > > skipFurtherProcessing = true; > > > } > > > if (!skipFurtherProcessing && log.isTraceEnabled()) > > > log.trace("exiting applyRequestValues in " > > > + LifecycleImpl.class.getName()); > > > return skipFurtherProcessing; > > > } > > > And that is repeated as many times as phases are. The fix will be to extract the common behavior in a method, that receives one additional parameter - PhaseExecutor and delegate to it the real execution. > > > > -- > > This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > > - > > If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa > > - > > For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > -- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
