So coming from other frameworks, I'm surprised to see that while
allowing FormBeans, WW2 doesn't encourage them anymore than just
putting the properties on the action. While I can't see a problem with
it, there's a voice in my head telling me to run away screaming.
As my last post mentioned,
Hello,
I've got a problem. How can I get the value from multiple select? I've got
following code in template.vm:
select name=multi size=5 multiple
option value=1One
option value=2Two
option value=3Three
option value=4Four
option value=5Five
/select
Now I need the set/get method. Which
ohh why didnt I think of that..
Jason Carreira wrote:
It would have to be passed in the session... A redirect is a new
request...
-Original Message-
From: Francisco Hernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OS-webwork]
It's a pity that WW1's DefaultActionFactory factory attribute is package
protected and not class protected... it'd be useful to extend
DefaultActionFactory and just append some additional proxies to the default
chain. Or am I missing some basic way of accomplishing that?
This is where the WW2 IoC
Yes, the order of, not related, elements is constrained in XML.
-Original Message-
The problem was that the order of these elements was not the same as in
the error message above. Is this how it should be? (I don't know very
much about xml and parsing but it seems pretty stupid if the
i've got an action field defined as:
private Long someLong;
public void setSomeLong(Long someLong) { this.someLong = someLong; }
public Long getSomeLong() { return this.someLong; }
on the url if I use myAction.action?someLong=12345 it works, but if i
use myAction.action?someLong=12345x
I Get
uh oh i dont want extreme scalability problems with my app either, i
better look into a better way of dealing with sessions
and to elaborate on the part about starting sessions in xwork
interceptors or servlet filters, if I were to start a session in an
interceptor or filter and stuff it into
If you're using domain objects or persisting the data, I would suggest
you use Object properties. Say, for instance, that you have an Invoice
domain object. You might have an CreateInvoiceAction Action class:
Public class CreateInvoiceAction extends ActionSupport {
private Invoice invoice =
You can create your own ActionFactory and specify your class in the
webwork.properties
-Original Message-
From: Darryl Pentz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 6:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OS-webwork] WW1's DefaultActionFactory
It's a pity
The change was that I turned on XML validation.
The order is constrained, but doesn't necessarily have to be, if people
think it shouldn't be... I've made some of the sub-elements not choosy
about the order of their sub-elements because it was a pain
Jason
-Original Message-
From:
Please log a Jira issue for this... That should not stop processing
altogether...
-Original Message-
From: Francisco Hernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OS-webwork] preventing ognl exceptions?
i've got
The fact that it's not a class built specifically for backing this
form... Struts requires you to build form beans which extend an abstract
base class. Here you're just using your same domain objects directly,
without a mapping layer.
-Original Message-
From: Anoop Ranganath
I was replying to his statement that he:
currently in my daos i create a session object for every
dao operation like dao.save dao.load, etc
I was assuming that he was also doing a flush after each of these
operations.
-Original Message-
From: Jason Carreira
This is not how
Oh, I must have missed that part... I did see the part with the
ThreadLocal Session... Yes, creating a new Session for each DAO call is
a BAD idea. One session per request is the way to go.
-Original Message-
From: James Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17,
To the original poster: Can you file an issue about this and mail me its
number? It's a reasonable fix that makes life easier, even if it's
socially unacceptable and apparently gives stomach cramps to
inheritance-hating purists ;)
Jason Carreira said:
Whatever your feelings about Inheritance,
Ok, in this case they are constrained to the specific order made in the
dtd. Either this has to get into the docs (easy solution) or the dtd may
be changed to allow any order (which I think also leads to changes in
the XmlConfigurationProvider; it's supposed all elements but action are
:-)
A little. I'll look again. Did you send to Mike, too? He's got some code
to do the same things...
Jason
-Original Message-
From: Matthew E. Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork]
I've added the DTD to the Wiki... I think they need to remain
constrained for the reason you mentioned... We only want one block of
Interceptor declarations, etc...
-Original Message-
From: Jonas Eriksson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:36 AM
To:
Also, I believe that the build in XWork converters support turning
String[] - List. Just a slightly nicer format. :)
-Pat
- Original Message -
From: Bernard Choi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:38 AM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] How to get
Title: Message
It may also be that it DOES see your xwork.xml file
but there is another problem happening (maybe a class is mistyped?) I'd
recommend stepping through the code in xwork to find the problem. In the
meantime, I think it sounds like we should be doing better error
reporting.
Patrick:
According to Wiley's website, the books is due in November. When
will this code be available? The code I sent Jason has some similar
interfaces but I would prefer to standardize on one as it would seem
weird that Conductor is not based upon the same code (and practices) as
the
+1 to that... The code from the book looked good... You guys interested
in contributing it (or at least the infrastructure bits)?
-Original Message-
From: Matthew E. Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
I agree... Just busy right at the moment... The DTD is out there on the
wiki if anyone wants to take a few minutes and add the necessary
detail...
-Original Message-
From: Jonas Eriksson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FYI: I believe this is how the Spring Framework got started.
Cheers,
matthew
On Wednesday, September 17, 2003, at 10:31 AM, Jason Carreira wrote:
+1 to that... The code from the book looked good... You guys interested
in contributing it (or at least the infrastructure bits)?
-Original
Why would you want to try to keep a transaction open across multiple
requests? Multiple database connections can be handled by a JTA
transaction manager (XA 2PC)... Multiple VMs would probably also work
with JTA, but why would you want/need this?
-Original Message-
From: James Cook
Speaking of which, have you taken a look at that? Would it make sense to
make that the basis of Conductor?
-Original Message-
From: Matthew E. Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork]
Speaking of Spring... has anyone looked at combining Spring's
Hibernate support with WW2? I'm currently doing this with WW1,
haven't had a chance to switch to WW2 yet. But there seem to be
some similarities to the components that Pat mentioned:
- HPM is analogous to Spring's HibernateTemplate
-
Multiple requests does not necessarily mean a long-lived transaction. I
was thinking of a general case when one may want to use a redirect thus
creating a second request.
Basically, I was asking Pat if the book's framework used Hibernate in a
way that supports transactions especially in a
While we are on the topic of Hibernate..
Cheers,
matthew
Begin forwarded message:
From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 12:08:45 PM US/Central
To: Gavin King [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: hibernate list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Hibernate] JBoss welcomes Gavin and Hibernate
I have looked at Spring and even had a chance to write some code using
it. However, I am not yet at a decision on it.
As previously mentioned, there is some work to do in order to plug in
Spring's IoC. We would lose some of the beauty of Actions having their
components set without XML
I can't wait for the next mock-interview on the BileBlog with Gavin on
why he joined JBoss!
Cheers,
matthew
On Wednesday, September 17, 2003, at 01:01 PM, Hani Suleiman wrote:
Ohdear, poor Hibernate. Foolish Gavin. He seemed like such a nice guy
when
I met him too.
Matthew E. Porter said:
+1.
Cheers,
matthew
On Wednesday, September 17, 2003, at 12:50 PM, Francisco Hernandez
wrote:
I'd really like to take a look at this code myself too, could you
please let the list know when you contribute it.
Pat Lightbody wrote:
Not sure when the book is due -- the final manuscript has
I don't know how to ask this, but I'm too curious not to: what reasons might
Hibernate have had to not join JBoss?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Matthew E. Porter
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
-Original Message-
From: Matthew E. Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] hibernate/webwork2 best practices
I have looked at Spring and even had a chance to write some
code using
it.
*donning flameproof suit*
Because Jboss sucks?
-Original Message-
From: Robert Douglass [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Fwd: [Hibernate] JBoss welcomes
Gavin and Hibernate
I don't know how
Title: Message
You're right about it seeing the xwork.xml file since I
changed one of the attributes and redeployed and had it complain about it being
an invalid attribute. I've validated my current xwork.xml file against the DTD
with xmlspy and it says the document is valid but the root
Oh. Didn't know. Hope you've got a good flameproof suit :-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Jason Carreira
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Fwd: [Hibernate] JBoss welcomes Gavin and
Title: Message
You
haven't defined the result type here... I'm checking in a change which will
throw a nicer more descriptive error.
You
need to either specify the result types or include a file which does (such as
webwork-default.xml).
See:
Just kidding... Sort of... I'm sure people use it productively. I've
never had the time to try to figure it out.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Douglass [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] Fwd:
+1 on removing legacy dependency on Action interface. Let's make Xwork
truly a generic command framework.
-Original Message-
Sorry that I didn't post this comment to the mailing list to begin with.
It is also on the Wiki, probably not the best place for a meaningful
technical discussion.
Title: Message
Try it
with the webwork-default.xml too... make sure your package is extending
webwork-default so it picks up those settings...
-Original Message-From: Peter White
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 3:32
PMTo: [EMAIL
Title: Message
Carlos? You trying to send us a message?
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:
Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:02 PMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [OS-webwork] (no
subject)
Ohdear, poor Hibernate. Foolish Gavin. He seemed like such a nice guy when
I met him too.
Matthew E. Porter said:
While we are on the topic of Hibernate..
Cheers,
matthew
Begin forwarded message:
From: Bill Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 12:08:45 PM US/Central
Hi,
I'd opened this JIRA http://jira.opensymphony.com/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=WW-305
I'm now navigating throught the XWork and WW2 code I'd be very very happy to
contribute with this
feature but I'd like to have some guidelines how you guys think could be a good
approach to
implement it.
But wouldn't this technique break if you have 2 browser windows open?
- Original Message -
From: Cameron Braid [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:48 PM
Subject: RE: [OS-webwork] formbean vs. action
One problem that comes to mind with this
if anyones intrested I just saw video interview with Jason about
xwork/webwork, its at: http://www.theserverside.com/events/index.jsp
its a good rundown of a bunch of the xwork/webwork2 features.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored
what is PetSoar and Confluence?
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
Also FWIW Ara and I have matured the infrastructure used in PetSoar for
Confluence, as we found that a combination of IoC and ThreadLocals worked
best when using Hibernate across disparate frameworks.
I'm hoping to pull this code out and
I had the same worries about this too, I just ended up null'ing the
fields that were 'illegal' to set in the request.
Cameron Braid wrote:
One problem that comes to mind with this approach is that if someone
'hacks' the request, specifying parameters that aren't meant to be
coming in.
i.e -
It depends... If you use the TokenTag and use different token names from
form to form then it will only be a problem if you have two windows open
to the same form. If you saved the parameter names per form name
(instead of using tokens) it wouldn't be a problem.
I would say, though, that if
I tried looking at the examples for using the token interceptor but
either i dont understand how its supposed to work or its just not
working, I followed the instructions on this example:
Click here for an example of the Form Tag and the Token Tag for hidden
transaction tokens. This example
Were you seeing it going through and reprocessing the page?
Are you using Mozilla or IE? I noticed with my Mozilla that it kept
doing a GET when I hit the back button to go back to the form after
posting it... I'm not sure why... I'm relatively certain it's not
supposed to do that. I resorted to
Im using Mozilla, Firebird to be exact, the example with
tokenSessionInterceptor works now as described when using IE, so is this
a bug? or mozilla just not playing the way it supposed to?
Jason Carreira wrote:
Were you seeing it going through and reprocessing the page?
Are you using Mozilla
I think Mozilla is not playing the way it's supposed to If I post a
form then hit the back button, it shouldn't send a GET to re-render that
page... There's really no way to determine if that's the case and treat
it differently, is there?
-Original Message-
From: Francisco Hernandez
I meant to add that I havn't implemented this process yet..
I was hoping that someone with a little more knowledge of the JSP
taglibs and the Token stuff could help ?
Cam.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Cameron Braid
Sent: Thursday, 18
I cant think of a way to determine if thats happened myself
Jason Carreira wrote:
I think Mozilla is not playing the way it's supposed to If I post a
form then hit the back button, it shouldn't send a GET to re-render that
page... There's really no way to determine if that's the case and
ok i wasnt sure how this token interceptor was working but it looks like
you can only submit a token once then on the next re-submission (by
hitting reload) it wont execute the action and just return a
invalid.token result string, I havent even checked the wiki to see if
this was covered but
I haven't played with it yet... but what about the new validation stuff?
Could you maybe set up a validator such that any call to an illegal setter
is rejected as invalid input?
- Original Message -
From: Jason Carreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September
57 matches
Mail list logo
