From: "Adrian Crum" <[email protected]>
Maybe we should also decide on whether it is spelled "grey" or "gray." ;-)
I fight hard to write correctly grey but as with prodcut most of the time I failed
and write gray (here I must say I"m not a
dyslexic). For prodcut I don't know why (though I suspect our hands to be used
to the word cut) but have a look at
http://www.nabble.com/forum/Search.jtp?local=y&forum=2740&query=prodcut : I'm
not the only one :D
For gray may be I'm influenced by Scott's name ?
Anyway I have changed my mind and I think it does not make sense to call something grey list at this stage, protected-view seems a
better name. The grey list concept will be at used at the end of the process. When a login is unable to access a view again without
admin intervention.
About the protect-view attribute (was allowGrayList below), I think now that we should better set it to false by default. This will
make the process a bit faster since most of the time views will not be protected. BTW I wrote something to deal with that in
RequestHandler.doRequest but I'm really not satisified by my solution (I hard coded a method name). I put it in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2074 for review. I will try to rewrite it today, suggestions highly appreciated.
Jacques
-Adrian
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
I think the phrase "grey list" is easier to speak about this functionnality and
easier to understand and remember. So I propose
to
use it rather than the tarpit word when speaking about this at large (I will
change Entities names, fields, etc. accordinlgly
when appropriate)
As we use a prepocessor, to avoid any bad surprise later, I propose we
introduce in site-conf.xsd an attribute allowGrayList in
request-map element. It would work like track-visit and track-serverhit being
true by default (though I wonder if we should not
do
reverse to false).
Jacques
