Igor Vaynberg wrote:
well yes, but jbq was saying we should create a special page for when this
happens. and i disagreed. and then you disagreed with me, so are you
agreeing with jbq?
I'm agreeing with you. <grin>
This stuff is so much easier to do on IRC / IRL. :)
<AlMaw> Well, it should probably be like this:
<AlMaw> If you're using WicketServlet, serve a 404.
<AlMaw> If you're using WicketFilter, let it fall through and
let the container deal with it.
<ivaynberg> agreed
<AlMaw> As the container will do it for you.
<AlMaw> In a way it won't for the servlet, obviously.
<AlMaw> If you're using WicketFilter then you need an <error-page>
mapping in your web.xml
<AlMaw> Unless you're happy with the default container 404 page.
<AlMaw> In which case, fine.
<ivaynberg> I think I confused filter and servlet
<ivaynberg> darn
So, erm, yeah. :-)
I'm not against a PageNotFound page for the WicketServlet. I think the
user should provide one for the filter case if they're not happy with
the default container one. I guess we need a setting for a servlet-based
one so the user can customise it.
Al
