Re[2]: Extensibility of struts Property Security

2001-11-28 Thread Oleg V Alexeev
Hello Arron, I think that it is intersting and flexible approach. Can you supply samples for it or refactor existing code to support such ideas? Wednesday, November 28, 2001, 6:37:06 AM, you wrote: AB Not a special class, I'm talking about placing it into the process. AB Before the servlet

Re: Extensibility of struts Property Security

2001-11-28 Thread Ted Husted
Arron wrote: How does the current buffering mechanism do its thing for flat beans?... Is there a short answer without telling me to go read the code?... :) The ActionForms ~are~ the buffering mechanism. That's one reason why they are not an interface. They should not be tied directly to a

Re[2]: Extensibility of struts Property Security

2001-11-28 Thread Oleg V Alexeev
Hello Arron, Ideas... Great. I think that source code samples can be more useful than abstract ideas in free style. Every developer in this list has his own work and doing struts-related activity by his free time. If you can help in this way to the community, please post code and config samples

Re: Extensibility of struts Property Security

2001-11-27 Thread Arron Bates
Yes, yes. Point made. That series of emails makes for some good bedside reading. I think that the solution that was arrived at is fine for protecting the struts system objects themselves. Is there anything happening to allow the developer to protect their own properties from this kind of

Re: Extensibility of struts Property Security

2001-11-27 Thread Ted Husted
Personally, I have the feeling that it's better to encourage people to define a proxy object, or wrapper, as was done with the ActionServlet, than invent a special class for people to learn. I actually believe that this is the approach that should have been used in the first place, and in other