RE: why are we coding Web apps?

2008-07-16 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Your reason is a special instance of a much more general reason. Web applications are much easier to deal with from a deployment perspective than desktop applications. Also, there are firewall and security issues surrounding access to central data repositories that web applications handle

RE: New Wicket Grails Plug-in Available + about the Groovy wicket builder

2008-07-23 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Anonymous inner classes are nice for their brevity but they are not required. You can declare those as concrete classes. I'm not too sure about Groovy but you should be able to put them in the same file. -Original Message- From: JulianS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22,

RE: Spring injection not working

2008-07-23 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Should UserDAO in the XML be userDAO? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:14 PM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: Spring injection not working On Jul 23, 2008, at 12:10 PM, James Carman wrote: Have you tried

RE: Strict 4 digit year for DateTextField?

2008-07-25 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I've had the same problem using java.text.DateFormat to validate the same pattern you are using. The solution I use is to check the string length to ensure that it is 10 characters. It might be nice if PatternDateConverter were to be enhanced to have a required length value to enforce this in an

RE: Strict 4 digit year for DateTextField?

2008-07-28 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
of at this point. Aye On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had the same problem using java.text.DateFormat to validate the same pattern you are using. The solution I use is to check the string length to ensure that it is 10 characters. It might be nice

RE: WicketSessionFilter Problem: java.lang.IllegalStateException

2008-07-30 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
One more suggestion is to declare the filter so that it is invoked when request dispatcher methods are called: filter-mapping filter-nameWicketSessionFilter/filter-name url-pattern*.do/url-pattern dispatcherREQUEST/dispatcher dispatcherINCLUDE/dispatcher /filter-mapping I'm not sure if

RE: CSRF Protection: double submitted cookie

2008-10-22 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I need to read more about this, but I am interested to know if there are any advantages to storing the token in a cookie for validation rather than putting it into the session. I suppose if statelessness is required then it is necessary. One advantage to storing it in session is that it does

Authentication and Assigning a Session Id

2008-03-10 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Hi Everyone, Is it possible to control when Wicket issues a valid session identifier to the user? The use case I am trying to support is only assign a valid session id to the user after they successfully authenticate. This is important to prevent possible session hijacking. When dealing with

RE: Authentication and Assigning a Session Id

2008-03-10 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Everyone, Is it possible to control when Wicket issues a valid session identifier to the user? The use case I am trying to support is only assign a valid session id to the user after

RE: Authentication and Assigning a Session Id

2008-03-10 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: Authentication and Assigning a Session Id wicket's Session has invalidate() and invalidateNow() -igor On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While it is true that the jsessionid token is not controlled by application code

RE: downloading Wicket examples

2008-03-13 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
They come bundled with the Wicket download under src\jdk-1.5\wicket-examples -Original Message- From: Andrew Broderick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:45 AM To: 'users@wicket.apache.org' Subject: downloading Wicket examples Hi, I found many useful Wicket

Creating Custom Form Components

2008-03-19 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I was perusing Wicket's Javadocs and I came across a link to an old thread http://www.nabble.com/Why-add%28IBehavior%29-is-final--td7248198.html#a7 248198 Linked from http://wicketstuff.org/wicket13doc/org/apache/wicket/Component.html#add( org.apache.wicket.behavior.IBehavior) The gist is

Suggested Enhancement To Spring Support

2008-03-19 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
It might be a nice improvement to Wicket's Spring support to allow for missing bean definitions to be handled gracefully. This would allow for the use of a sane default in the absence of explicit declaration in the context XML. Right now using the Spring annotations support I get the following

RE: Suggested Enhancement To Spring Support

2008-03-20 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
to swallow the exception? then you would return a null into a proxy and cause an npe later... -igor On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It might be a nice improvement to Wicket's Spring support to allow for missing bean definitions to be handled

RE: Suggested Enhancement To Spring Support

2008-03-20 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Spring bean is no longer a singleton, but as long as your beans are stateless this does not really matter. - Lars On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suppose I need to learn more about how Spring support is implemented in Wicket. My thinking

RE: Double submit problem

2008-03-25 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Sorry, I should have attributed that code to Joel. -Original Message- From: Zappaterrini, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:56 AM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: RE: Double submit problem I don't have a patch, at this point I was just testing

RE: Removing the jsessionid for SEO

2008-04-03 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
When Google asks to not have special treatment for their bot, they are referring to content more than anything. Regarding the session id being coded in the URL, see the Technical guidelines section of Google's Webmaster Guidelines -

RE: Wicket and Eclipse WTP

2008-05-07 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Double click on the Tomcat server in the Servers view. In the editor, select the Modules tab. Select your web application and click Edit. Uncheck Auto reloading enabled. That always does the trick for me. Now if there were only a way to have it default to unchecked when deploying a new

RE: MarkupNotFoundException

2008-05-09 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Are IpLookupPage.html and BasePage.html both in the same location as IpLookupPage.class and BasePage.class respectively and on the testing classpath? -Original Message- From: AlexTM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 2:41 AM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject:

RE: Wicket java.lang.IllegalAccessError bug?

2008-05-19 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I can't get the ternary statement you provided to compile correctly using 1.4-M1. The error I get is: The type AbstractChoiceT,E is not visible Due to the fact that the common ancestor for ListMultipleChoice and ListChoice is the inaccessible package protected object AbstractChoice. This

RE: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

2008-05-21 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I think that is only part of the problem in this instance. The other part of the problem is that Base.class presents only runtime information. There is no way to invoke Base.Voidclass to get ClassBaseVoid in a manner similar to how you can invoke a generic method. The type represented in the

RE: How to strip wicket tags from markup in development mode?

2008-05-21 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
In Application.init add getMarkupSettings().setStripWicketTags(true); -Original Message- From: Lauri Lehtinen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 1:09 PM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: How to strip wicket tags from markup in development mode? Hi - Is there an

RE: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on generics with Wicket

2008-06-02 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I am currently using 1.4 M1 and here are my choices: 1) Generifying* Wicket [X] Can best be done like currently in the 1.4 branch, where models and components are both generified. I care most about the improved static type checking generified models and components give Wicket. 2) How strongly

Wicket-Security and Wicket 1.4

2008-06-02 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Is there any timeframe for the development of a version of Wicket-Security that is compatible with Wicket 1.4? I know Wicket 1.4 is still a moving target, but I am curious to know what the plan for Wicket-Security is. Thanks, Larry __ The information contained in this message is

RE: Wicket Session and non-Wicket Servlet

2008-06-03 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
The way the your web.xml is configured does not have the requests going to JasperReportServlet getting filtered by WicketSessionFilter. Change the filter mapping for WicketSessionFilter from /app/* to /report/* or /* and you should see it work the way you want.

RE: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

2008-06-04 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
This is my take on it: http://www.nabble.com/RE%3A-%28Class%3C--extends-Page%3C-%3E%3E%29-casti ng-troubles-p17370699.html I feel it covers the topic pretty thoroughly but I am by no means an expert on the matter. -Original Message- From: Martin Funk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

RE: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

2008-06-06 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
In the example you have detailed, RawBar is not a subtype of Bar? since it extends the raw type Bar. -Original Message- From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:31 AM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

RE: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

2008-06-06 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 4:16 PM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles Zappaterrini, Larry wrote: In the example you have detailed, RawBar is not a subtype of Bar? since it extends the raw type Bar. I guess it depends

RE: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

2008-06-09 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
is wrong with ClassFoo clazz = Foo.class? Cheers, Larry -Original Message- From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 3:57 AM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles Zappaterrini, Larry wrote: Sorry, I should

RE: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles

2008-06-09 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
: Mon 6/9/2008 12:54 PM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: (Class? extends Page?) casting troubles Zappaterrini, Larry wrote: Sebastiaan, Point 1 is a good one. I haven't puzzled that through completely. Upon initial inspection it seems that it is just the compiler being pedantic about

RE: Making Component easier to Generify

2008-06-12 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
It is not about assuming anyone is an idiot. It is about preserving maintainability and allowing an API to evolve without breaking client code. The best approach is to mark members as final unless there is a compelling reason not to. Final is a safeguard for APIs to know what behavior is

RE: Making Component easier to Generify

2008-06-12 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Could I dig this one back up then ;) http://www.nabble.com/Creating-Custom-Form-Components-td16159841.html#a1 6159841 Basically my request was to remove final from FormComponent.add(IValidator...) to aid in creating custom form component subclasses based on precedent with

RE: Session end method

2008-06-20 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Assuming this is backed by an HttpSession, wouldn't you also have to register an implementation of HttpSessionListener via web.xml to handle the situation where the HttpSession times out? Correct me if I'm wrong, but in that instance, onUnbind will not be called and the Thread would never be

RE: Is it safe to share static components across multiple page instances and request threads?

2008-06-20 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
My guess would be no, since the object hierarchy of a page is a fundamental aspect of Wicket. I don't think that instances of Wicket Component objects are meant to be thread-safe and shared between different Component trees. There is all kinds of mutable data in Component that is not meant to be

RE: Session end method

2008-06-23 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: Session end method Wicket doea that for you, unbind is called when session is terminarted by the container On 6/20/08, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming this is backed by an HttpSession, wouldn't you also have to register an implementation

RE: Session end method

2008-06-23 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
to read the javadoc. -igor On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ah, I see that now. I didn't dig deep enough. When I first started working with Wicket sessions I was assuming (bad I know!) that Session.invalidate would be called when the HttpSession timed out

RE: Session end method

2008-06-23 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Subject: Re: Session end method what resources are those? like i said before, by the time you get notification that the session is expired you can no longer access attributes within session. -igor On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 8:29 AM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see. So then would

RE: Session end method

2008-06-23 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
. -igor On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Zappaterrini, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Say for instance the session contains a resource such as a database connection or a thread (Eyal's original question) that needs to be freed when the session is invalidated. Is there (or should there) be a more

RE: generics

2008-06-24 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
I'm getting the same thing. -Original Message- From: Martin Funk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:42 AM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: generics basically we feel this is a much cleaner way then what is 1.4m2. this is a call for

RE: Tomcat 6 clustering problem

2008-06-25 Thread Zappaterrini, Larry
Well in a production situation there would be one host name used and failover would just change which server the requests to that host name get routed to. In that scenario the same cookies would be used so no problem. You should be able to use some trickery in your hosts file to mimic this. Add a