On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Eric Berg eb...@bergbrains.com wrote:
On 3/4/11 11:03 AM, Gerda Shank wrote:
On 3/4/11 8:23 AM, Eric Berg wrote:
I'm trying to do some progressive engagement by allowing one of my forms
to be filled out before a user is required to log in, but once the form is
Erez,
Am 06.03.2011 um 22:43 schrieb Erez Schatz:
As for HTML::Formhandler, I dunno whether this has been addressed, but
when we used it (at my previous place of employment) we ran into some
severe issues of, and I quote again, misbehaviour due to modified
state after reset causing leaks and
On 7 March 2011 11:15, Matthias Dietrich mdietr...@cpan.org wrote:
Erez,
Am 06.03.2011 um 22:43 schrieb Erez Schatz:
As for HTML::Formhandler, I dunno whether this has been addressed, but
when we used it (at my previous place of employment) we ran into some
severe issues of, and I quote
I want to make one path in my app password protected, and a very simple way will be
fine. Also, while in development, I want to make the whole think password protected.
I thought I'd just use .htaccess. But, since this isn't really an appache directory
(except for static files), where would
Hello!
I want to make one path in my app password protected, and a very simple
way will be fine. Also, while in development, I want to make the whole
think password protected.
I thought I'd just use .htaccess. But, since this isn't really an
appache directory (except for static files),
Hello,
I use an ExtJS-form, which sends an AJAX-request to the server.
Depending on the server-results the user should now be redirected to
another page,
but somehow it doesn't work any more, when I use AJAX-requests. Normal
forms are no problem.
I have used constructions like this:
AFAIK you would need to return the uri to the browser, as your ajax
response and redirect the browser using javascript.
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Cylon Toaster cylontoas...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello,
I use an ExtJS-form, which sends an AJAX-request to the server. Depending on
the
AFAIK you would need to return the uri to the browser, as your ajax
response and redirect the browser using javascript.
yes, thank u, this was my emergency-solution. I just thought it could
also be done by the server, more elegantly ;-)
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Cylon
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:46 AM, John M. Dlugosz wxju46g...@snkmail.com wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:28 AM, Andrew Rodland andrew-at-cleverdomain.org
|Catalyst/Allow to home| wrote:
Or, since you know that what it generates *doesn't* have a fragment you could
always just $c-uri_for_action(...) .
On 3/7/11 5:18 AM, Erez Schatz wrote:
IIRC, there were issues with labels on controls. We wanted no label on
a button, and had to override the button render method. There were
some other stuff in which the way we wanted the form to look didn't
fit the way H::FH thought a form should look,
Reading the FormFu documentation, I was referred to Template::Alloy.
After reading about that, I want to switch from TT to using that! So, if it's everything
it claims to be, why isn't that the default and used by all the examples I've seen?
Should I think twice about it?
--John
On 7 March 2011 16:00, John M. Dlugosz wxju46g...@snkmail.com wrote:
Reading the FormFu documentation, I was referred to Template::Alloy.
After reading about that, I want to switch from TT to using that! So, if
it's everything it claims to be, why isn't that the default and used by all
the
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Roger Horne ro...@hrothgar.co.uk wrote:
On Sunday 06 March 2011 20:52:04 Devin Austin wrote:
FormFu is pretty awful in my opinion. Rose::HTML stuff isn't
much better.
As an amateur I would be interested to know why.
When I started learning about Catalyst
You can safely use Location /xxx based control's (if using apache)
Francisco
On Mar 7, 2011, at 2:22 AM, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
I want to make one path in my app password protected, and a very simple way
will be fine. Also, while in development, I want to make the whole think
password
From: Devin Austin devin.aus...@gmail.com
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Roger Horne ro...@hrothgar.co.uk wrote:
On Sunday 06 March 2011 20:52:04 Devin Austin wrote:
FormFu is pretty awful in my opinion. Rose::HTML stuff isn't
much better.
As an amateur I would be interested to know
On 3/7/2011 9:34 AM, Ronald J Kimball rkimball-at-pangeamedia.com |Catalyst/Allow to
home| wrote:
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:46 AM, John M. Dlugoszwxju46g...@snkmail.com wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:28 AM, Andrew Rodland andrew-at-cleverdomain.org
|Catalyst/Allow to home| wrote:
Or, since you know
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Devin Austin devin.aus...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Roger Horne ro...@hrothgar.co.uk wrote:
On Sunday 06 March 2011 20:52:04 Devin Austin wrote:
FormFu is pretty awful in my opinion. Rose::HTML stuff isn't
much better.
As an amateur
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John M. Dlugosz wxju46g...@snkmail.com wrote:
On 3/7/2011 9:34 AM, Ronald J Kimball rkimball-at-pangeamedia.com
|Catalyst/Allow to home| wrote:
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:46 AM, John M. Dlugoszwxju46g...@snkmail.com
wrote:
On 3/6/2011 5:28 AM, Andrew
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Ashley Pond V a...@sedition.com wrote:
Using the fragment is probably a bad idea. It's not supported by all
servers so it can end up lost on the backend depending on your setup.
I can't figure out what you mean by this. This is a URL that will be
included in
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Ashley Pond V a...@sedition.com wrote:
I use FormFu and have no problem with it and there is ultimately no
difference between doing things in config or in code, it's all code
and rendering in the end and HTML forms and form processing is just a
messy business
On 3/7/2011 1:35 PM, Ashley Pond V apv-at-sedition.com |Catalyst/Allow to
home| wrote:
Using the fragment is probably a bad idea. It's not supported by all
servers so it can end up lost on the backend depending on your setup.
-Ashley
I've never heard of a web server that didn't have
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM, John M. Dlugosz wxju46g...@snkmail.com wrote:
On 3/7/2011 1:35 PM, Ashley Pond V apv-at-sedition.com |Catalyst/Allow to
home| wrote:
Using the fragment is probably a bad idea. It's not supported by all
servers so it can end up lost on the backend depending on
In order of importance, my considerations when making the decision about
a year ago (no existing Cat apps at that point) were:
Adoption Rate: I subscribed to mailing lists for FormFu and HFH, and
noticed more people talking about HFH.
Moosiness: Since Catalyst was making the move to Moose,
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Ronald J Kimball
rkimb...@pangeamedia.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM, John M. Dlugosz wxju46g...@snkmail.com
wrote:
On 3/7/2011 1:35 PM, Ashley Pond V apv-at-sedition.com |Catalyst/Allow to
home| wrote:
Using the fragment is probably a bad idea.
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:01:42 -0800, Ashley wrote:
What Ronald said + the #fragment is not passed along in the available
ENV with some servers and setups. In these cases it doesn't exist as
far as the backend is concerned. If you rely on it for dispatch, you
may get burned.
Uhm, the _browser_
Using the fragment is probably a bad idea. It's not supported by all
servers so it can end up lost on the backend depending on your setup.
I have see fragments cause problems in server-side code that is naive
about URL handling, like splitting the string on ? and assuming all
the stuff after
2011/3/7 Adam Sjøgren a...@koldfront.dk:
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:01:42 -0800, Ashley wrote:
What Ronald said + the #fragment is not passed along in the available
ENV with some servers and setups. In these cases it doesn't exist as
far as the backend is concerned. If you rely on it for dispatch,
From: Steve st...@matsch.com
In order of importance, my considerations when making the decision about a
year ago (no existing Cat apps at that point) were:
Adoption Rate: I subscribed to mailing lists for FormFu and HFH, and
noticed more people talking about HFH.
Moosiness: Since Catalyst
28 matches
Mail list logo
