Hi! I've created a gist to discuss possible ways to implement multipart-support in AeroGear Controller: https://gist.github.com/danbev/fec1fe498cabdf0aef6a Any suggestion/comments are welcome. /Dan

_______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

I'll take a look at what the mapping might look like and post back with a suggestion. >same here, not sure if still (good) maintained, since it (multipart) is now part of the servlet spec; Good point here Matthias. Let me take another look into this and see if we can somehow use the MultipartConfig from the spec. This would have been our first choice, but as far as I know this is not supported from a filter but only when used on a Servlet. I'll see if there is another way to do this. Thanks for the feedback! On 15 April 2013 17:50, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote: > >> On Monday, April 15, 2013 10:00:14 AM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: >> > Hi! >> > >> > I've created a gist to discuss possible ways to implement >> > multipart-support in AeroGear Controller: >> > https://gist.github.com/danbev/fec1fe498cabdf0aef6a >> > >> > Any suggestion/comments are welcome. >> > >> > /Dan >> I don't mind relying on commons-fileupload. >> > > same here, not sure if still (good) maintained, since it (multipart) is > now part of the servlet spec; > > > >> >> It would be nice (but more work) if we could marshall objects with >> multipart like we can with JSON. For fields which aren't files that is >> easy. For fields which are files we would have some behavior to define. >> >> I'm all for making easy bindings for common types (maybe byte[], File, >> InputStream, BufferedImage) and having an easy way to inject custom >> processing (perhaps with annotations). >> > > that would be nice, to have an easy mapping > > > >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > aerogear-dev mailing list >> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Nice write up ! Beside the controller side, and talking about consistency, did our Pipes support mutlipart ? A common use case would be a hybrid app that wants to upload a picture from the camera, would be really nice if we can do this with a Pipe.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com <mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com>> wrote: I'll take a look at what the mapping might look like and post back with a suggestion. >same here, not sure if still (good) maintained, since it (multipart) is now part of the servlet spec; Good point here Matthias. Let me take another look into this and see if we can somehow use the MultipartConfig from the spec. This would have been our first choice, but as far as I know this is not supported from a filter but only when used on a Servlet. I'll see if there is another way to do this. Thanks for the feedback! On 15 April 2013 17:50, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com <mailto:supittma@redhat.com>> wrote: On Monday, April 15, 2013 10:00:14 AM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: > Hi! > > I've created a gist to discuss possible ways to implement > multipart-support in AeroGear Controller: > https://gist.github.com/danbev/fec1fe498cabdf0aef6a > > Any suggestion/comments are welcome. > > /Dan I don't mind relying on commons-fileupload. same here, not sure if still (good) maintained, since it (multipart) is now part of the servlet spec; It would be nice (but more work) if we could marshall objects with multipart like we can with JSON. For fields which aren't files that is easy. For fields which are files we would have some behavior to define. I'm all for making easy bindings for common types (maybe byte[], File, InputStream, BufferedImage) and having an easy way to inject custom processing (perhaps with annotations). that would be nice, to have an easy mapping > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev