No, just working with it as a user.

bob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Phase Web and Multimedia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 12:59 PM
Subject: RE: Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility


> Bob,
>
> Are you involved in the development of the workflow proposal?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 11:50 AM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility
>
>
> I have looked at the Workflow stuff and will probably use it.  It will
work
> great for the problem mentioned here.
>
> However, I will be making some changes/extensions to it to make it easier
to
> use.  It is a little too low level "out-of-the-box."  Extending it has
been
> easy since all of the basics are there.  The base design looks great - a
> good start - but needs to be flushed out.
>
> bob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phase Web and Multimedia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 12:21 PM
> Subject: RE: Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility
>
>
> > Peter do you know anything about the workflow proposal and if it
addresses
> > this issue. I don't want to carry on about this if something standard is
> in
> > the works. Also, let's move this discussion over the the developer
group.
> I
> > was a bad boy and started a discussion on the dev and the user. Bad
> posting
> > edicate :-).
> >
> > Brandon Goodin
> > Phase Web and Multimedia
> > P (406) 862-2245
> > F (406) 862-0354
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.phase.ws
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peter Pilgrim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 10:06 AM
> > To: Struts Users Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I got the XML completely wrong, haven't I
> >
> > <struts-config
> > xmlns:struts="http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/struts-config.dtd";
> >            xmlns  xmls:acme="http://www.acme.com/acton-processor"; >
> >
> > ...
> >
> >     <struts:extensions>
> >       <!-- within the struts extension body tag we can handle
> additions -->
> >       <acme:processor>
> >             <acme:process-group name="check-login-and-authorize">
> >                   <acme:process-action name="com.mydomain.LoginCheck">
> >                   <acme:process-action
name="com.mydomain.UserAuthorize">
> >             <acme:/process-group>
> >       <acme:/processor>
> >     <struts:extensions>
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> > </struts-config>
> >
> > Extension are recognised inside a <struts:extension> tag.
> >
> > In this way nobody is forced to use the <acme:processor> tags.
> > Developer add other extension or replace the existing one with
> > better extensions, or delete a deprecated extension.
> >
> > All extension are then optionally and downloadable and plug-in able.
> >
> > Unless my understanding my of XML and namespaces is completely wrong
> > this should in theory work in principle?
> >
> > --
> > Peter Pilgrim                       ++44 (0)207-545-9923
> >
> > ............................................ Swamped under electronic
> mails
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------- Message
> > History ----------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > From:  Peter Pilgrim/DMGIT/DMG UK/DeuBa@DMG UK on 26/04/2002 14:27 CET
> >
> > Please respond to "Struts Users Mailing List"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > To:    "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > cc:
> > Subject:    Re: Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > So why do not subclass Action and make another abstract
> >  AcmeSecureAction of your self that does the login check and
> > the authorise.
> >
> > There is real danger that your other action may accidentally
> > miss the security check, if say a newbie developer forgets
> > add the process-group tags.
> >
> > If you want to add this to the struts-config XML then the
> > Struts Digester code needs changing. I would suggest looking at
> > ways that the digester code could be expanded with namespaces
> >
> > <xmlns  xmls:acme="http://www.acme.com/aciton-processor";
> >
> > <acme:processor>
> >      <acme:process-group name="check-login-and-authorize">
> >           <acme:process-action name="com.mydomain.LoginCheck">
> >           <acme:process-action name="com.mydomain.UserAuthorize">
> >      <acme:/process-group>
> > <acme:/processor>
> >
> > Some sort of factory interface I guess. and additionally
> > ActionServlet init parameters
> >
> > digesterExtension=com.acme.struts.digester.ActionProcessor
> >
> > --
> > Peter Pilgrim                       ++44 (0)207-545-9923
> >
> > ............................................ Swamped under electronic
> mails
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------- Message
> > History ----------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > From:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 26/04/2002 07:46 AST
> >
> > Please respond to "Struts Users Mailing List"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > To:    "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > cc:
> > Subject:    Re: Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > So for example, if I wanted to ensure a user was logged in, then check
> > their authorizatoin for a particular URI, could I do something like:
> >
> > <processor>
> >      <process-group name="check-login-and-authorize">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.LoginCheck">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.UserAuthorize">
> >      </process-group>
> > </processor>
> >
> > Then I could reuse this logic without having to embed it in each action
> > class.
> >
> > Is this what you're proposing? Do I understand correctly?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Phase Web and Multimedia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04/25/2002 05:36:57 PM
> >
> > Please respond to "Struts Users Mailing List"
> >       <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > To:   "Struts User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > cc:
> > Subject:  Struts Improvement Proposal: Logic Extensibility
> >
> >
> > Okay here is the idea I proposed earlier ("Struts (MVC) Shortcomings?")
in
> > more solid thought.
> >
> > My hope in this is to provide an non-hard-coding mechanism to take
> > advantage
> > of reusable logic without having to forward around to a bunch of Action
> > classes (which doesn't work anyways).
> >
> > Here is my proposal:
> >
> > An action mapping could have an associated Process Config specified in
the
> > <set-property> of the action class. Something like:
> > <set-property name="processor" value="processa" />
> >
> > An associated config file called processor.xml could be set up to define
> > process patterns that have names associated with the value attribute of
> the
> > set-property. Something like:
> > <processor>
> >      <process-group name="processa">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisA">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisB">
> >      </process-group>
> >      <process-groupname="processb">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisB">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisC">
> >      </process-group>
> >      <process-groupname="processd">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisX">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisC">
> >           <process-action name="com.mydomain.ProcessThisN">
> >      </process-group>
> > </processor>
> >
> > This config info could be placed into the Application Scope at the app
> > startup using the plugin mechanism of Struts 1.1.
> >
> > When an Action is called it would look to see what "process group" it
> needs
> > to call and using reflection to perform the specified chain of
processing
> > in
> > the order specified in the process-groupname config.
> >
> > A process class would conform to an interface and would have access to
> > everything that the Action has access to. This way any errors or scoped
> > beans/Attributes that need to be set can be set from within the process
> > class. Also, the process class could access other logic beans for sql
and
> > such.
> >
> > Any unique coding that needs to happen can still be contained in an
Action
> > class. But for code that is reusable. This would be very nice.
> >
> > Brandon Goodin
> > Phase Web and Multimedia
> > P (406) 862-2245
> > F (406) 862-0354
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.phase.ws
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <
> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: <
> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > This e-mail message (including attachments, if any) is intended for the
> use
> > of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> > information that is privileged, proprietary , confidential and exempt
from
> > disclosure.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified
that
> > any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> > strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error,
> > please notify the sender and erase this e-mail message immediately.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
you
> > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
> > please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
> > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
> > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
you
> > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
> > please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
> > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
> > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to