I have now created a patch and attached it to the bug (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1095). Granted, it is not a really big change (one-liner).
Can you advise me on what is now the next step in the process, how do I get it reviewed and eventually committed? Thanks in advance, Dirk On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, I totally agree. :) I was just commenting because this thing hasn't > worked for YEARS... Thanks for finding it.. > > Dirk Krummacker wrote: >> >> Scott, >> >> Thanks for the confirmation. I have already created an issue earlier >> today: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TRINIDAD-1095 >> >> This setting might not be used too often, but we need it, so please >> don't delete ;-) >> >> Dirk >> >> >> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> The source code is wrong so please log a JIRA ticket. Process Scope was >>> the >>> name of page flow scope before oracle donated the code to apache. >>> Obviously >>> somebody forgot to change the source to match the new name used in the >>> documentation. :) Shows how often that setting is used. >>> >>> Scott >>> >>> Dirk Krummacker wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> We are using pageFlowScope to "carry over" data from request to >>>> request. It quite nicely fits our requirements (better than >>>> t:saveState which we used before). We are using the token-based >>>> approach where the actual data is stored in the session and only a >>>> token ("_afPfm") is added as a request parameter. In order to allow >>>> for some degree of "back-button-history", the mechanics of the >>>> pageFlowScope store not only one instance of the data in the session, >>>> but the data for the last 15 requests (default value). >>>> >>>> Because of a certain usage pattern we expect from out users >>>> (right-click and external URLs) I wanted to increase this value to 30. >>>> Memory is not an issue, we expect only a fairly low number of users >>>> and the data is not so huge anyway. For this, I consulted the >>>> documentation in the developer's guide on >>>> >>>> >>>> http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/devguide/configuration.html#trinidad-config.xml >>>> and found the parameter "page-flow-scope-lifetime". This seemed to be >>>> exactly what I was searching for, and so I added it to my >>>> trinidad-config.xml. >>>> >>>> But that didn't work. Using a debugger and the Trinidad source, I >>>> found out that the code was actually checking for the parameter of the >>>> name "process-scope-lifetime". With that name, everything worked fine >>>> for me. >>>> >>>> Now my question is: Is this possibly a bug in the documentation, or is >>>> the source code wrong? The documented name "page-flow-scope-lifetime" >>>> makes more sense to me, plus I have never heard of the term >>>> "process-scope" in the context of the pageFlowScope. Maybe a remnant >>>> from ADF times? >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance, >>>> >>>> Dirk >>>> >>>> >>> >>> > > -- _____________________________________________________________ Dirk Krummacker - Phone: +420 602 633 050 Rozšířená 18, 182 00 Praha 8, Czech Republic ICQ: 236241892 - Skype: dirk.krummacker
