On Thursday 27 May 2010 12:41:10 James Carman wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 2:34 AM, Emond Papegaaij > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > In our application we use quartz for long running jobs. These threads > > have access to the application context, which contains the wicket > > application. In the execute method, we locate the application and use > > Application.set and Application.unset to set and remove the application. > > This is, however, not a 'public API' and could easily be replaced by > > wrapping the main body in a Runnable and calling Application.wrap. I'm > > in favor of this wrap method. It allows you to set the application on a > > thread, without having to use non- public API, and without the > > try/finally hassle. > > What happens if you have multiple applications running in the same webapp?
Well, the answer is pretty simple: we only have one application per webapp. :) If we wanted to supported multiple applications, we probably would pass the application in some way to the jobs (we already pass other information, such as the user starting the job). > > I do not care how this method is implemented (that's the beauty of a good > > API, isn't it?). It could store the application in the runnable, or look > > it up in a map, as long as it works reliably, I'm fine with it :) > > Right, we can figure out how to implement it later, but I think making > this method available would be a huge step in the right direction. > Agreed. Emond --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
