[jira] Moved: (SHALE-123) Enhancement to Shale Dialogs

: (was: Nightly Build) Assign To: (was: Struts Developer Mailing List) > Enhancement to Shale Dialogs > > > Key: SHALE-123 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-123 > Project: Shale > Type: Improv

RE: [Shale] Dialogs

any progress on this right now? -Matthias > -Original Message- > From: Matthias Wessendorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 7:33 PM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: [Shale] Dialogs > > > I attached my clazz to jira. >

Re: [Shale] Dialogs

> I attached my clazz to jira. nevermind, bugzilla... http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38298 -Matthias - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Shale] Dialogs

Craig, I created a phaselistener, which is able to invoke the dialog. I attached my clazz to jira. Maybe this (workaround?) is usefull for you too. In our (simple?) case it works :-) -Matthias On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:54 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote: > On 1/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PR

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38298] - Enhancement to Shale Dialogs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38298] - Enhancement to Shale Dialogs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38298] New: - Enhancement to Shale Dialogs

gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38298 Summary: Enhancement to Shale Dialogs Product: Struts Version: Nightly Build Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component:

Re: [Shale] Dialogs

On 1/6/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Shales, > > I can start the *dialog* stuff by using action="dialog:Go" .../> > > However, is it possible to a login page (w/ j_security) > and after sucessfull login do *forward* to my "Go" dialog? Right now, it's not possible to d

[Shale] Dialogs

Hi Shales, I can start the *dialog* stuff by using However, is it possible to a login page (w/ j_security) and after sucessfull login do *forward* to my "Go" dialog? Or do I have to provide a "hello press that button" pages *after* a user logs into that application? -Matthias ---

Re: Rép : [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

Time to catch up with my Struts emails ... I haven't looked at Shale Tiger yet so I can't comment on that part. As for the dialogs, I prefer XML configuration similar to what we already have. Our dialogs are pretty complicated and its hard to imagine the more sophisticated aspect

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

guration > after I have ported my application. By then I'll know if it is overkill or > not. > > Hermod > > -Original Message- > From: Alexandre Poitras [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 11:12 PM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject:

RE: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

w if it is overkill or not. Hermod -Original Message- From: Alexandre Poitras [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 11:12 PM To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration Hey I like the idea of using Jackrabbit for configuratio

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 4:15 PM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: RE: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration > > > > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Hei > > > > If we where to look into a better config

RE: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

ruts Developers List Subject: RE: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hei > > If we where to look into a better configuration control, I would suggest > taking > a close look at Apache Jackrabbit (JSR-170). This gives amon

Rép : [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

I'm not advocating my off the cuff solution, which of course has drawbacks. I'm just suggesting that we think about something along these lines. I wouldn't mind seeing a less powerful interface, if you will, into dialogs that requires no configuration. btw, it seems to me that, to some degree, COC

RE: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hei > > If we where to look into a better configuration control, I would suggest > taking > a close look at Apache Jackrabbit (JSR-170). This gives among a lot of good > things, versioning. You can even run with (Embedded) Derby as a backend, or > just > a pl

RE: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

05 5:10 AM To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration > > > Off the top of my head, I don't see why we couldn't define dialog > > > structure > > > with filesystem conventions and flow with custom tags in JSP pages

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

esh out all their navigation, > before they ever start coding individual pages). > Ah, that modeling thing? ;-) I'm sure hand-authoring is a sign of competence, but pictures, anyone? Like this rendition of the Shale log-on dialog: http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/sandbox/scxml/us

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

> > > Off the top of my head, I don't see why we couldn't define dialog > > > structure > > > with filesystem conventions and flow with custom tags in JSP pages. For > > > example, by default, a root dialog directory named WEB-INF/dialogs > > > (users > > > could override with a context init

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

On 12/22/05, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >From: David Geary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This is from a blog entry about my Shale presentation at Javapolis at > > http://blog.dannynet.net/: > > > > The other presentation was about Shale , by > > > David Geary (who has some interesting b

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

>From: Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On 12/21/05, David Geary wrote: > > So, this guy's comments finally got me thinking: do we really need an XML > > config file for Shale Web Flow? If we could do away with that artifact, we > > could make web flow even easier to use and differentiate ou

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

>From: David Geary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > This is from a blog entry about my Shale presentation at Javapolis at > http://blog.dannynet.net/: > > The other presentation was about Shale , by > > David Geary (who has some interesting blog > entriesabout > his experiences with Ruby and Rails by t

Re: [shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

On 12/21/05, David Geary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, this guy's comments finally got me thinking: do we really need an XML > config file for Shale Web Flow? If we could do away with that artifact, we > could make web flow even easier to use and differentiate ourselves further > from Spring Web

[shale] Dialogs and Convention over Configuration

This is from a blog entry about my Shale presentation at Javapolis at http://blog.dannynet.net/: The other presentation was about Shale , by > David Geary (who has some interesting blog > entriesab