you can make your entire application url aware, that shouldnt really
be a problem. i think you will run into interesting things when trying
to have two spring contexts share a single servlet context though.
-igor
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has
I want to try to limit the places that actually must know they're running in
a multi-site context. I would also likek to avoid having separate filters
for each site... So, I've been experimenting tonight with a few ways of
doing it. I have this working - but could you tell me if there may be
Cool. I can see that you now and the links in onBeforeRender(). So is this
the recommended approach for creating extendible components? What are the
reasons to not to add all child components in this method?
igor.vaynberg wrote:
fixed in trunk for 1.4, i will fix in 1.3.x later today when
it is called every time the page renders. Though creating objects
isn't *that* expensive, imagine recreating all your components with
every request for every user, discarding all the components you
already created one request earlier.
Martijn
On 4/26/08, John Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. So is this the way we should build all components that could be
extended? If so, how about adding an initialisation hook to avoid this
problem and the need to call super.onBeforeRender() (which I forgot recently
and took me a while to find)... and also to give it a more intuitive name
We have discussed this over and over on the list. Search the archives.
Short answer: NO.
Martijn
On 4/26/08, John Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. So is this the way we should build all components that could be
extended? If so, how about adding an initialisation hook to avoid
Sorry, I did find a discussion which was related [1] which ended with Igor
saying:
yes, but its also easy to fix. Just don't call any overridible methods
inside constructors. And for everything else there is onbeforerender()
If this is the recommended way to write extendible components I could
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Carman wrote:
Why are you using the Spring injector to inject your dependencies?
Can you not manually inject your dependencies? Adding stuff manually
to a Spring context and then having
and what does /login do?
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 4:51 AM, mfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guys,
I am using RedirectPage class to redirect to an external url, and
strangely
it just gets stuck in an endless loop..any idea as to what the problem
could
be ?
i.e.
new
John Krasnay wrote:
This rule is too strict. Another way to avoid calling overridable
methods from the constructor is to use a model:
Models are fine for providing dynamic values but do not help you customise
components by extension. For example, to provide a different type of link
to
If it is a wicket page then it has to be parsed..
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:41 AM, hjuturu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Martin/All
In my page the HTML that is created is dynamic (has embedded widgets or
gadgets) and we dont have control over the tags in the wicket page.
or tags doesnt have
ListMultiplyChoice expects a Collection not an Array as the model object
Else it doesnt know how to fill it (currently)
public ListMultipleChoice(final String id, IModelCollectionT object,
final ListT choices)
so change this:
...
public void setPermissions(Authority[] permissions) {
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 04:46:11AM -0700, John Patterson wrote:
John Krasnay wrote:
This rule is too strict. Another way to avoid calling overridable
methods from the constructor is to use a model:
Models are fine for providing dynamic values but do not help you customise
Hi,
I'm like to submit a form using bookmarkable page style, so that
a) the form can always be submitted, regardless if the session is expired or
not (think of a Google search submission e.g.,
http://www.google.com/search?q=wicket)
b) the form remembers PageParameters that were there when the
John Patterson schrieb:
Thanks. So is this the way we should build all components that could be
extended? If so, how about adding an initialisation hook to avoid this
problem and the need to call super.onBeforeRender() (which I forgot recently
and took me a while to find)... and also to give
I'm not sure why the built-in Wicket component doesn't support this feature
out-of-the-box, but here is a simple fix/solution:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 4:17 AM, John Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, I did find a discussion which was related [1] which ended with Igor
saying:
yes, but its also easy to fix. Just don't call any overridible methods
inside constructors. And for everything else there is
I assume the query values will come through in the page parameters, which is
fine since I'm already using those.
Thanks,
-Doug
igor.vaynberg wrote:
override the form's action value in its oncomponenttag callback with a
url to a bookmarkable page. but then you have to parse all posted
We shouldnt call it onInitialize, onFirstRender is fine, onInitialize
looks like a really after constructor call to me, but it is called
much later, if it is called (onvisible checks and so on)
On 4/26/08, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 4:17 AM, John Patterson
onBeforeFirstRender() ? , onFirstRender() is ambiguous with its
relation to onbeforerender()
-igor
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We shouldnt call it onInitialize, onFirstRender is fine, onInitialize
looks like a really after constructor call to me,
James Carman wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Carman wrote:
Why are you using the Spring injector to inject your dependencies?
Can you not manually inject your dependencies? Adding stuff manually
to a
they should
-igor
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Doug Donohoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume the query values will come through in the page parameters, which is
fine since I'm already using those.
Thanks,
-Doug
igor.vaynberg wrote:
override the form's action value in
Thxnbsp;fornbsp;advicenbsp;-nbsp;Inbsp;triednbsp;tonbsp;usenbsp;thenbsp;mentionednbsp;gzipnbsp;filternbsp;andnbsp;itnbsp;seemsnbsp;tonbsp;worknbsp;:)
Inbsp;havenbsp;notnbsp;detectednbsp;anynbsp;problemnbsp;innbsp;mynbsp;application.
I'm also having either the same issue or one very similar.
The problem I'm seeing seems to be isolated to IE. The specific build
version of IE 7.0.5730.11. The issue only seems to have come up on one of 5
machines and assuming the specific IE build maybe an issue.
Here's a description:
We are
its just an login page outside of the wicket application context...the url is
constructed as http://[host-name]/login
..
mfs wrote:
Guys,
I am using RedirectPage class to redirect to an external url, and
strangely it just gets stuck in an endless loop..any idea as to what the
problem
I was able to find another machine with the same build of IE and the issue
came up again.
bglynn wrote:
I'm also having either the same issue or one very similar.
The problem I'm seeing seems to be isolated to IE. The specific build
version of IE 7.0.5730.11. The issue only seems to
John Krasnay wrote:
Sure, but your rule said Call all overridable methods from
onBeforeRender(), and I gave you a working counterexample that has
nothing to do with onBeforeRender.
The counter example was the exact mistake that is very easy to make when
designing a component that can be
I solved it!
I modified the mock application class and it worked as I expected
public class MockWicketApplication extends WicketApplication {
private AnnotApplicationContextMock mockContext;
@Override
protected void internalInit() {
mockContext = new
But this still does not fully support different versions of the lib.
So if one extension uses version 1.0 of javascript lib A and another
uses version 2.0, chances are you have a problem. because both
extensions call some api that might not be available or has changed in
the other version.
just
But as Johan has already pointed out. onBeforeFirstRender (or whatever
it is called) might not be called at all if the component is not
(allowed to be) rendered. This is probably going to confuse people
just as much as the current situation.
And if we have an initialize method which should be
John Patterson wrote:
The counter example was the exact mistake that is very easy to make when
designing a component that can be extended. So easy to make that even the
mighty super genius Igor initially did it in PagingNavigation. So most
mere mortal wicketeers could not be expected to
Mr Mean wrote:
But as Johan has already pointed out. onBeforeFirstRender (or whatever
it is called) might not be called at all if the component is not
(allowed to be) rendered. This is probably going to confuse people
just as much as the current situation.
And if we have an initialize
And what does this mean? What if 2 different extensions are
contributing to a header 2 different versions of YUI or prototype? Is
it possible in javascript? I think no. You will definitely have a
conflict. One of this versions will take a precedence. Being able to
include javascript libraries by
Ok, maybe i am sounding way to negative today, either that or i am not
expressing myself clear enough :)
I wasn't saying that letting the user include his or her desired
library is without benefit. I was merely stating that it does not
solve everything.
Anyway, i'll shut up for today and hope my
I am not talking about a level of wicket perfection :) I really
like the idea to contribute to the header scripts that are locally
stored in the java package if those scripts are somehow proprietary
for the component being imported. But I am a bit worried about the
fact that such commonly used
but what good will that do? so components do not automatically
contribute the javascript. instead you have to now do it yourself, and
if you contribute an incompatible version you are still left with a
nonworking component. so what is better now?
wicket-datetime is not part of core, and even if
| if you contribute an incompatible version you are still left with a
| nonworking component. so what is better now?
At least I'll be able to include the latest one.
Anyway in this scenario a component author will (I hope) properly
define the list of all libraries the component
Maurice Marrink wrote:
But this still does not fully support different versions of the lib.
So if one extension uses version 1.0 of javascript lib A and another
uses version 2.0, chances are you have a problem. because both
extensions call some api that might not be available or has changed in
personally i like to be able to simply include the datepicker and not
have to worry or research what javascript library it uses.
but sure, i guess we can add a simple boolean
datepicker.contributeDependencies() that you can then override and
return false.
of course then it puts burden on any
-- personally i like to be able to simply include the datepicker and not
-- have to worry or research what javascript library it uses.
I would definitely do the same but the javascript often comes the
developer hell and any hidden includes injected by the component
itself can make
some kind of exception being thrown maybe?
try debugging it. it's an interesting and educational trip through wicket
internals anyway.
if you still can't figure it and you think it's not your problem, boil it
down to a quickstart example and attach the example to a JIRA bug and
someone will
create a jira issue for the datepicker please
-igor
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Vitaly Tsaplin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- personally i like to be able to simply include the datepicker and not
-- have to worry or research what javascript library it uses.
I would
Guys,
I am working on a wicket app which needs to provide
inter-operability/single-sign-on support with an external mod_plsql based
app.
Among one of the tasks is to synchronize the session-timeouts between these
two application. For now we have decided on a temporary solution (somewhat a
Its an external app on the same web-server..I think RestartResponseException
would work if the /login lies in the same application-context..right ?
Jonathan Locke wrote:
btw, if Host is your local host (same web app), you probably want to throw
a RestartResponseException instead of
Eventually its throws StackOverFlow exception...
Jonathan Locke wrote:
some kind of exception being thrown maybe?
try debugging it. it's an interesting and educational trip through wicket
internals anyway.
if you still can't figure it and you think it's not your problem, boil it
Mr Mean wrote:
Such an initialize method can easily be done by users them self with a
simple factory pattern.
Can you give an example of this?
Mr Mean wrote:
So why bloat our api with it?
Building such extendable components seems to be a core feature of wicket and
one of its
46 matches
Mail list logo
