On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Bhathiya Jayasekara
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Inosh Goonewardena
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback, some interesting points were brought up
>>>
>>> @Abimaran,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Anjana Fernando wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So we are starting on porting the earlier DAS specific functionality to
> C5. And with this, we are planning on not embedding the Spark server
> functionality to the primary binary itself, but rather run it separately as
> another
Hi Prabath,
Primary goal is to group the configurations but we can achieve isolations
with access control.
Let me describe with the diagrams.
With the current implementation we have individual SP configurations. And
we need to set all the configurations (Claim, authentication chain etc..)
in each
Thanks!
Few questions related to the certificate-based handler...
1. Why do we expect username to be passed along with the request and it's a
must...?
2. Also, we are not checking whether we have the original certificate - we
only rely on the TLS mutual auth validation at the container level - wh
Hi All,
The connector is released and published in the store [1].
[1]
https://store.wso2.com/store/assets/esbconnector/list?q=%22_default%22%3A%22ActiveCollab%22
[2] https://docs.wso2.com/display/ESBCONNECTORS/ActiveCollab+Connector
Vivekananthan Sivanayagam
Associate Software Engineer | WSO2
E:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Anjana Fernando wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So we are starting on porting the earlier DAS specific functionality to
> C5. And with this, we are planning on not embedding the Spark server
> functionality to the primary binary itself, but rather run it separately as
> another
Hi,
So we are starting on porting the earlier DAS specific functionality to C5.
And with this, we are planning on not embedding the Spark server
functionality to the primary binary itself, but rather run it separately as
another script in the same distribution. So basically, when running the
serve
If you really want to handle all exceptions being thrown in the same way
you can use a multi exception catch block[1](supported from Java 7) to do
this. That way the component developer doesn't have to worry about defining
exception hierarchies, which is really not the concern of the component
deve
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Harsha Kumara wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Malith Jayasinghe
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Harsha,
>>
>> It makes sense to define specific exceptions. However, I am wondering (in
>> most of these cases) whether the caller can do anything specially to handle
+1 for having custom exceptions. However, as Malintha mentioned I believe
it will help us having exception hierarchy. There may be cases where
catching top level exceptions may be sufficient. If we have a hierarchy,
programmer can decide which one to use depending on the context.
Thanks
Susinda
O
10 matches
Mail list logo