Andreas Junghans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You're right, and I'm probably to blame for that :-( (But I do wonder how > you missed it when using the feature ;-))
Easy. SWAT is intentionally set up with a common set of RPC states to handle awaiting a response to a request, determining if the response was "not logged in", providing a login window, sending the authentication request to the server, and then, upon authentication success, re-issuing the original user request. No concurrent user requests can be made, so I had no need for the id. :-) >> I think that fixing the first problem (naming) will allow an easy fix to >> the second problem (missing data being sent to final listener). What do >> you think of this (untested) patch: > [snip] > > Looks good to me (not tested however). Ok. I'll test it and check it in. Derrell ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
