Hi Mike,
Thank you for the suggestion - however, the same web.xml worked fine
as a standalone, but not as a portlet.
In the source code of tomahawk 1.1.9, there is a class
TomahawkFacesContextWrapper.java, which has a block of comments saying
the following:
* One use that has this wrapper is in portlets (there is no PortletFilter
* on portlet api 1.0, so to take all tomahawk advantages (components
* that uses some javascript handled by AddResource api and fileupload
* support) users must configure this alternative.
* </p>
* <p>
* When it is used this alternative, the params used to configure
* MultipartRequestWrapper (file upload support) are set using this
* web.xml config params:
* </p>
* <ul>
* <li>org.apache.myfaces.UPLOAD_MAX_FILE_SIZE</li>
* <li>org.apache.myfaces.UPLOAD_THRESHOLD_SIZE</li>
* <li>org.apache.myfaces.UPLOAD_MAX_REPOSITORY_PATH</li>
* <li>org.apache.myfaces.UPLOAD_MAX_SIZE</li>
* <li>org.apache.myfaces.UPLOAD_CACHE_FILE_SIZE_ERRORS</li>
* </ul>
*
and in ExtensionsFilter.java, I saw the following comments under init().
public void init(FilterConfig filterConfig) {
// Note that the code here to extract FileUpload configuration
params is not actually used.
// The handling of multipart requests was moved from this
Filter into a custom FacesContext
// (TomahawkFacesContextWrapper) so that Portlets could be
supported (Portlets cannot use
// servlet filters).
//
// For backwards compatibility, the
TomahawkFacesContextWrapper class *parses* the
// web.xml to retrieve these same filter config params. That
is IMO seriously ugly
// and hopefully will be fixed.
so my interpretation is that the init() is not being used at all when
running as a portlet (please correct me if this interpretation is not
correct).
However, we are still using tomahawk v1.1.3 and tomahawk-bridge
0.9.2(?) because our jars have been customized (hacked) to work around
the issue of gridsphere naming. And in tomahawk v1.1.3, the class
TomahawkFacesContextWrapper.java didn't exist.
Please see this blog for details on the hack/customization
http://marcus-christie.blogspot.com/2006/10/myfaces-jsf-and-gridsphere.html
I am just wondering what would happen if I upgraded to v1.1.9 - would
tomahawk-bridge 0.9.2 still work? I don't think we can use the
portlet-bridge jar provided by apache because we are still using
gridsphere v2.1.5.
Any other suggestions/insights? Thanks.
-- Jim
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Mike Kienenberger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Maybe the web.xml isn't valid?
