[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Changing beanfactoryType class attribute
by adrian@jboss.org
"kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4107156#4107156
| Following from this I need to change the class attribute of beanfactoryType to be optional
|
|
| | <xsd:complexType name="beanfactoryType">
| | <xsd:annotation>
| | <xsd:documentation>
| | </xsd:documentation>
| | </xsd:annotation>
| | <xsd:sequence>
| | <xsd:element name="alias" type="aliasType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | <xsd:element name="classloader" type="classloaderType" minOccurs="0"/>
| | <xsd:element name="constructor" type="constructorType" minOccurs="0"/>
| | <xsd:element name="property" type="propertyType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | <xsd:element name="create" type="lifecycleType" minOccurs="0"/>
| | <xsd:element name="start" type="lifecycleType" minOccurs="0"/>
| | <xsd:element name="depends" type="dependsType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | <xsd:element name="demand" type="demandType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | <xsd:element name="supply" type="supplyType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | <xsd:element name="install" type="installType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | <xsd:element name="uninstall" type="installType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
| | </xsd:sequence>
| | <xsd:attribute name="name" type="xsd:string" use="optional"/>
| | <!--
| | <xsd:attribute name="class" type="xsd:token" use="required"/>
| | -->
| | <xsd:attribute name="class" type="xsd:token" use="optional"/>
| | </xsd:complexType>
| |
|
| I think it makes sense for aspect to be an extension of beanFactory so that we get all all the property, start, stop etc. stuff for free rather than having to redefince all that stuff?
|
| Objections?
Don't do that. Create an abstractBeanFactoryType
then extend in two different ways in the different schemas:
| <xsd:complexType name="abstract-BeanfactoryType">
| ...
| </xsd:sequence>
| <xsd:attribute name="name" type="xsd:string" use="optional"/>
| <!-- NO class here -->
| </xsd:complexType>
|
| <complexType name="beanFactoryType">
| <complexContent>
| <extension base="abstract-BeanFactoryType">
| </extension>
| <xsd:attribute name="class" type="xsd:token" use="required"/>
| </complexContent>
| </complexType>
|
You can then choose not to have the class attribute at all in your type.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4107306#4107306
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4107306
18 years, 4 months
[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Nested property ref
by alesj
"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote :
| The first one looks a bit hacky to me. You only recurse until the second to last
| property using getters to locate the object then use the setter for the last property.
|
Hmmm, looking at the code, this doesn't seem that easy/clean to do - doing it in current KernelConfigurator/Configurator notion.
The way we currently do this is that we do a PropertyInfo lookup in the Configurator, but the actual target invocation is done outside the property resolution scope.
But in our case, we would already need to know the target, in order to execute getters.
Or I can refactor ConfigureAction to do this with bypassing KernelConfigurator usage.
And perhaps adding warning or throwing exception if name param in Configurator.resolveProperty contains '.'?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4107302#4107302
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4107302
18 years, 4 months
[Design of JBoss Portal] - Connect Kerberized Apache with Tomcat/JBossPortal
by badock
Hello all,
I'm still trying to make my kerberized Apache work along with JBossPortal/Tomcat (1).
I managed to put a kerberized apache in front of JBossPortal, so now, if a client wants to access my portal, he has to authentificate to the kerberized Apache and _then_ he can access the portal.
That's good, but it is not enough...
The problem is, Apache only says "Allowed/NotAllowed", and once the user has logged, no one knows who he is... he's just one of the authorized users. I haven't found out yet how to get this informations, but apache must store it somewhere.
Anyway, what i want now, is that JBossPortal automatically logs the user without asking for password, only by trusting Apache telling it which user it is.
To sum up, here are the two questions i keep pasking myself :
1. How to obtain informations on the user who has logged on with Kerberized Apache ?
2. How to do, so that JBossPortal automatically logs the user, by trusting what Apache says ?
The first one might be only apache-related, but you may have some clues, and concerning the second question, you may know where to look.
Regards,
(1) cf : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4106371#4106371
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4107278#4107278
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4107278
18 years, 4 months
[Design of JBoss Build System] - buildmagic incompatible with ant 1.7
by scott.stark@jboss.org
It looks like buildmagic is incompatible with ant 1.7 because even though I have updated the version check to allow 1.7, it seems as though the ant.version property is not set:
| init:
|
| _buildmagic:modules:most:
|
| ======================================================================
| == Executing 'most' in module 'main'...
| ==
|
| _buildmagic:init:
|
| BUILD FAILED
| /Users/svn/JBossHead/jboss-head/tools/etc/buildmagic/buildmagic.ent:31: Unsupported Ant version:
|
| ant.version=${ant.version}
|
| Please install a version which is compatible with Ant 1.5 or 1.6.
|
| Total time: 1 second
|
I have to add -Dant.version="Ant version 1.7" on the command line to get past the version check. I'm half tempted to just drop the version check rather than hack into the buildmagic code.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4107210#4107210
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4107210
18 years, 4 months