Re: [gatein-dev] Username restrictions?

On Jan 27, 2012, at 3:23 PM, Christophe Laprun wrote: First results of the investigation: The information that might come from the XML configuration is converted into a org.exoplatform.webui.config.Component object that is used by UIComponent. However, the Component.getValidators method doesn't seem to be called from anywhere in the code. Moreover, based upon further investigation, while it may be possible to leverage WebUI configuration files for the purpose of injecting user-defined validation patterns, it would require way too much work for users to do so as they would: 1. need to edit the exoadmin.war portlet.xml file for each portlet they want to customize validation. That requires unzipping the war file. 2. copy whatever is in the file pointed at by the webui.configuration init param for that portlet into a new file and make that parameter point to that new file 3. edit that file to include the original content and add a validator section with the appropriate information 4. rezip the exoadmin.war file with potential implications on jar signing In theory, this would work but this is really complicated for something that many users want to do. In practice, I am not even sure that such mechanism would work. Alternatively, we could support the defaulting mechanism that's available at the kernel level where values can be dynamically replaced at runtime with support for default values. For example: ${gatein.conf.dir:classpath:/conf}/wsrp-producer-config.xml would result in the kernel first looking for a file in the gatein.conf.dir with the name wsrp-producer-config.xml. If that file is not found, then it will look for the same file under classpath:/conf. A similar mechanism could be introduced for resource resolvers at the portlet level meaning that we could change the exoadmin portlet.xml to contain such defaults so that the users could place an appropriately named file in gatein.conf.dir that would be used in priority over the default one found in exoadmin.war. This solution would, however, be only marginally easier for users since they would still need to copy the content of the original file before adding the appropriate validators section, which is not only far from intuitive but also error prone as they would have to repeat the process for each portlet they want to customize. This would also require a new resource resolving mechanism. If configuration could be additive instead of erasing, that would be a step in the right direction but that comes with its own set of (potentially worse) issues… All of this also relies on the fact that validators can actually be injected which I haven't been able to verify so far (a search for usage of the Component.getValidators method returns no match, though it might be called in .gtmpl which break traditional usage search of IDEs). So I'd recommend developing a custom solution better targeted at our users' need. I will write a specification for it but I also expect a specification document for the username accepted format so that I can properly define what the constraints need to be. Cordialement / Best, Chris == Principal Software Engineer / JBoss Enterprise Middleware Red Hat, Inc. Follow GateIn: http://blog.gatein.org / http://twitter.com/gatein Follow me: http://metacosm.info/metacosm / http://twitter.com/metacosm