New field on node type gtn:visible - how to migrate the data?
by Juraci Paixão Kröhling
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
All,
I'm sorry if the solution is obvious, but I couldn't find anything
that would give me an appropriate solution for this.
Basically, I have a task that involves adding a new property to nodes
[1]. However, when I start GateIn with data generated by an instance
without the patch, I get some exceptions related to the fact that the
new field is not present on the data storage.
Naively, I would expect the JCR to automatically add this new field …
[View More]to
the nodes that don't have it yet (as it would be trivial to just
create this field if it's not present), but it seems it's not the
case. So, I checked the JCR documentation, and there doesn't seems to
be anything related to this scenario, except perhaps for section
1.9.5.3 (Changing or removing existing PropertyDefinition or child
NodeDefinition) [2]
It seems to me that this is a change on a running system, not a
"migration" scenario.
So, the question is: what is the proper way to add a new property to a
node without having problems with the old data?
1 -
https://github.com/jpkrohling/gatein-portal/commit/7627fef1ad6f484c29c8eb...
2 -
http://docs.jboss.org/exojcr/1.15.7-GA/developer/en-US/html_single/#JCR.N...
Thanks!
Juca.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJS39E1AAoJECKM1e+fkPrXwWgH/3hcjzo+wBRgsi5UfdcJOEM5
HGZzE8+OKIDnUVbRVWdpxbEd4r+6HSggcNMx/FbMA6Y0MccCmgECh63rFC+6Xxci
U4/JhyVNJAFTlpCPTD2Jx+Ov8T1DU5x3HZu8SYFEVjQOIbTtVJk9IcT/g7O7xSNY
Q7FY6rdwMqHrQk6jRGOQ+U1BNx0gGdLk5yEcZow3NVqlUIzNtnCooTJxgFLlIA76
ejN4eynOC7i6KJPBS0SWXZEnVPaIxtxWhoAn+djRXVacgigBveamtdTNXJCkQPmv
waP4wAW79mM0HOK9MbFnankhF9tGOFArPqyc7zKopQh4y9ts3oPMPZ99Mt5EOAM=
=iwU2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[View Less]
11 years, 1 month
Impersonation in GateIn Portal
by Marek Posolda
Hi all,
We've been requested several times by our users/customers to add
"impersonation" feature.
It may be useful for portal administrator to have possibility to
temporary login as another user without knowing his password. For
example: User /root/ wants to verify that user /mary/ really doesn't
have permission to see page X or portlet Y on page Z.
I've added specification page here
https://community.jboss.org/wiki/ImpersonationInGateInPortal . Feel free
to provide feedback here or in …
[View More]comments of specification.
Have a nice weekend!
Marek
[View Less]
11 years, 1 month
RFC - Page Composition API
by Juraci Paixão Kröhling
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
All,
I'd like to kindly ask for your comments about a task that I'm
starting on GateIn 3.x, to extend the current API to allow portlet
developers to compose pages and add content to it.
I've put my initial thoughts and incorporated a few early feedback
propositions into the following wiki page, and I'd appreciate if you
could take some minutes to go through it and share your thoughts:
https://community.jboss.org/wiki/RFC-APIForComposingPages
…
[View More]I'm greatly interested in checking if my understanding of the current
situation is accurate, as well as getting attention to points that I
might have missed.
I have a few other smaller tasks to work on and I plan to start some
concrete coding by mid next week, so, I'd appreciate if you could
share your feedback by then -- or at least say "don't start, I've
found a fatal flaw, let's discuss first" :-)
Thanks!
Juca.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJS18HfAAoJECKM1e+fkPrXqG0H/0tyXzBANobSXJHq3puo7RRP
9xt3HSJL75r7gGrTh+aBhJ68rup5gPiiGo2gztZAtU2wv/J2MFyHA1VmAVjNUQEC
xWccWbAowFZQs9b4nTf9sk/iRWnR84Wu9DuDUaXZERDQzE05IhfQ3p/jJORJCL+X
yrCIKu0vm9q7ooR2RcwG5WcD13Ov2yUWyK+0fHR4oGnE436vozpHYbvzDJHJaq3V
WWPAJ5Z6AV26CiTO5Ik2uOptggXKnxcSkBAwiMpChQw3z5vAP0H0hy42QGFntQYv
18S6jTKBuHnbuvoCs/Xd7zVmAOp1rHLjbERp2zdCy2wGTixZET6ptotzyZbOocA=
=R1o0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[View Less]
11 years, 1 month
JCR 1.16.0-Alpha4 upgrade
by Julien Viet
Hi,
I am working on integrating JCR 1.16.0-Alpha4 in GateIn master.
For this purpose I will integrate it in MOP first and thus create a branch in this code base for 1.2.x and have master use 1.3.0-Beta01-SNAPSHOT.
Then I will proceed to GateIn upgrade itself.
let me know if that raise any issue.
Julien Viet
julienviet.com
11 years, 1 month
Merging
by Bolesław Dawidowicz
Could we try to avoid merging with bubbles unless there is clear
benefit? As it is described here up until now we managed to keep nice
history:
https://community.jboss.org/wiki/GateInPortalGitContributionGuide
However recently there were few merges with bubble without clear purpose
IMO.
We agreed in a past that when we merge larger topic branches it is ok to
do no-ff. In such cases it is rather hard to squash properly and it can
also lead to loosing history and not giving credit to …
[View More]everyone involved.
Still if branch contains only few nicely separated commits and each of
them is properly described with JIRA I see no clear benefit of no-ff merge.
Just a reminder that it would be nice to have some consistency in how we
handle git. I won't go on war to enforce it as in many cases it is a
matter of taste and personal preferences - still please use common sense
and try to follow agreed patterns.
--
Bolesław Dawidowicz
JBoss Portal Platform Architect | GateIn Portal Project Lead
[View Less]
11 years, 1 month
Potential impacts on URL encoding
by Lucas Ponce
Hello,
One of our customer is asking again for w3c validation.
We are studying points where gatein is not w3c compliant.
I think one of most dangerous is about "&" in URLs, according with w3c documentation:
------------------------
Ampersands (&'s) in URLs
Another common error occurs when including a URL which contains an ampersand ("&"):
<!-- This is invalid! --> <a href="foo.cgi?chapter=1§ion=2©=3&lang=en">...</a>
This example …
[View More]generates an error for "unknown entity section" because the "&" is assumed to begin an entity reference. Browsers often recover safely from this kind of error, but real problems do occur in some cases. In this example, many browsers correctly convert ©=3 to ©=3, which may cause the link to fail. Since ⟨ is the HTML entity for the left-pointing angle bracket, some browsers also convert &lang=en to 〈=en. And one old browser even finds the entity §, converting §ion=2 to §ion=2.
To avoid problems with both validators and browsers, always use & in place of & when writing URLs in HTML:
<a href="foo.cgi?chapter=1&section=2&copy=3&lang=en">...</a>
Note that replacing & with & is only done when writing the URL in HTML, where "&" is a special character (along with "<" and ">"). When writing the same URL in a plain text email message or in the location bar of your browser, you would use "&" and not "&". With HTML, the browser translates "&" to "&" so the Web server would only see "&" and not "&" in the query string of the request.
--------------------------
We did some experiments in the past to code "&" per "&" but this has negative effect into other components (i.e. WSRP).
Before to start making PoC about it, I would like to ask if someone also tried a similar approach and we can share our experiences about that.
Thanks,
Lucas
[View Less]
11 years, 2 months
