Agreed, it would be the most flexible solution overall - allowing the developer to programatically choose whether it's on or off.
Not that my opinion really counts :) > -----Original Message----- > From: Eddie Bush [mailto:ekbush@;swbell.net] > Sent: 18 October 2002 18:33 > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: Going to other context and/or server in 1.1 > > > +1 - that would simplify things a great deal. > > My idea was to have a static protocol list we'd iterate over - but I > like yours much better. > > Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > >On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, David Graham wrote: > > > >>Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:29:04 -0600 > >>From: David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Re: Going to other context and/or server in 1.1 > >> > >>I thought of the http:// matching as well. Are there any > cases when > >>this logic wouldn't work? Hardcoding the protocol may be a > bad idea. > >> > > > >Failure case: https://www.mysecuresite.com > > > >Maybe we need an "absolute" attribute on ForwardConfig (and > therefore > >ActinForward)? > > > > -- > Eddie Bush > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:struts-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For > additional commands, > e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org> > > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.401 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 09/10/2002 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.401 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 09/10/2002 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
