>> I'm trying to understand the rationale, though -- the description in
>> request-handler.lisp seems to indicate this was done in order to support
>> clients without cookie support.
>>
>> Is supporting browsers without cookies something we care about?
>
> Yes, but I don't understand why we would need the redirect in that
> place for this.

Do we really want to support cookie-less sessions? Why?

Django does not support sessions without cookies:

  The Django sessions framework is entirely, and solely, cookie-based. It
  does not fall back to putting session IDs in URLs as a last resort, as
  PHP does. This is an intentional design decision. Not only does that
  behavior make URLs ugly, it makes your site vulnerable to session-ID
  theft via the "Referer" header.
  (this is from http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/http/sessions/)

I killed the initial redirect in my application, which did not solve the
problem entirely. I don't fully understand why, but only
  (setf hunchentoot:*rewrite-for-session-urls* nil)
got rid of sessions in URL parameters entirely. Otherwise they would pop
up in strange places all of a sudden.

More fundamentally, though, I believe weblocks session handling needs to
be reworked, at least for my needs. I don't want to establish sessions
for every request, that's wasteful. Any externally-accessible URL can be
served without a session (possibly from a pre-rendered cache). It is
only when the user accesses actions that we really need a session.

This might have the added advantage of significantly speeding up
weblocks: you would not have to build the whole widget tree on every
request. My lazy-navigation does something similar to a certain extent,
but we could take it much farther.

--J.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"weblocks" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/weblocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to