Hi Thiago, thanks for fixing it!
Works fine now with 5.8.1-SNAPSHOT without including the TapestryModule. Cheers, Ben On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 4:07 AM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've hit the Send button too soon. > > I've just committed a fix for the problem I described above and now I'm > generating a new release with it. > > Please let me know if it fixes this problem. > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 11:51 PM Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo < > thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 12:17 PM Ben Weidig <b...@netzgut.net> wrote: > > > >> Hi! > >> > > > > Hello! > > > > > >> But I ran into a "tapestry.version not defined" issue. > >> The problem originates (as always) in our unique setup. > >> We run our Tapestry applications (web and non-web) as "normal" Java > >> application (e.g. "java -cp ... App") and programmatically create the > >> Registry and TapestryAppInitializer, and a custom Filter for an embedded > >> Jetty if web. > >> > >> In 5.6 the TapestryAppInitializer always added the TapestryModule > >> (containing "tapestry.version"). > >> Now, the TapestryFilter adds it instead via > >> > org.apache.tapestry5.TapestryFilter.provideExtraModuleClasses(ServletContext). > >> We fixed the issue by ImportModule(TapestryModule.class) in our > >> AppModule.But if a Tapestry app won't work without it, it should always > add > >> it IMO, > > > > regardless of using TapestryFilter. > > > > > > I believe this is caused by an oversight on my part when I split > > tapestry-http out of tapestry-core. I should have moved the factory > > contribution of tapestry.version to TapestryHttpModule. > > > > > >> > >> > >> That would make the new org.apache.tapestry5.TapestryFilter obsolete, > >> though, because all it does is provide TapestryModule. > >> I understand the general idea behind allowing filters to specify > >> additional > >> modules to be loaded. > >> But it isn't used anywhere except for TapestryModule so far. > >> > >> If there's an agreement that this is a problem and that it should be > >> reverted to the original behavior, I'll create an issue and fix it. > >> But I didn't want to revert any recently introduced behavior without a > >> discussion first. > >> > >> Cheers > >> Ben > >> > > > > > > -- > > Thiago > > > > > -- > Thiago >
