Clint Popetz
by Pete Muir
Clint is taking over the Seam-Wicket integration work from me.
He's already fixed a number of tricky bugs (around inheritance of
Wicket components) and added some great features (optional build-time
instrumentation of Wicket classes, support for hot-deploy of Wicket
classes).
17 years, 1 month
2.1.1.CR1 Release
by Shane Bryzak
Just a reminder that we're aiming for a release at the end of this week,
which gives us roughly 2 days. We still have about 50 open issues, so
if you have any issues that won't make it into the CR release please
slip them to 2.1.1.GA. If we have to slip a lot of issues we may end up
having a CR2 release.
Thanks!
17 years, 1 month
lost functionality in rule-based permission checks
by Dan Allen
Shane,
It appears that when the migration was made to the chain of permission
resolvers in Seam 2.1, the ability to place arbitrary objects into the
Drools working memory was lost. Before Seam 2.1, a permission check
consisted of a name, an action, and an unbounded set of contextual
objects. In Seam 2.1, only the first optional argument is considered,
and it's inserted into the working memory in place of the name.
public boolean hasPermission(String name, String action, Object...arg)
{
...
if (arg != null)
{
return permissionMapper.resolvePermission(arg[0], action);
}
else
{
return permissionMapper.resolvePermission(name, action);
}
}
I have quite a number of rules that rely on both the name and the
extra parameters. I'm sure others do as well. Can we change this logic
so that the permission mapper preserves the ordering of arguments and
the RuleBasedPermissionMapper stuffs the optional arguments into the
working memory?
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily
basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away
from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a week,
it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was
caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message if
you feel that it did not reach my attention.
17 years, 1 month
regarding issue in exception handling mechanism in seam
by ramesh rangaram
Hi
We are facing issue with the Exception Handling mechanism of Seam Frame work
.
We are using seam-2.0.2.SP1
We didn't configured any error page in the application, but seam frame work
is taking the request to error page (error.xhtml).
We are facing this issue when the Concurrent users hit the application
Where this page is configured in the seam frame work ?
Thanks in Advance
Regards,
Ramesh Rangaram,
17 years, 1 month
how / when seam redirects app error to error page in seam application
by ramesh rangaram
Hi
We are facing issue with the Exception Handling mechanism of Seam Frame work .
We are using seam-2.0.2.SP1
We didn't configured any error page in the application, but seam frame
work is taking the request to error page (error.xhtml).
We are facing this issue when the Concurrent users hit the application
Where this page is configured in the seam frame work ?
Thanks in Advance
Regards,
Ramesh Rangaram,
17 years, 1 month
heads up on a change to the context path of some examples
by Dan Allen
To help new developers find their way, I worked on making the context
path predictable for all example applications. A convention had
already been established, so it was just a matter of bringing all the
examples in line with it. Here's the convention.
If the example is being deployed as an EAR (typically to JBoss AS),
then the context path is seam-${example.folder.name}. So the dvdstore
example is accessed at the context path /seam-dvdstore.
If the example is being deployed as a WAR (typically to Tomcat w/
Embedded JBoss), the context path is
jboss-seam-${example.folder.name}.
The reason the WAR deployments are different is because the context
path is based on the name of the archive. It also makes the developer
aware of what type of deployment is being used (EAR or WAR). The
readme.txt in each example folder says whether it is an EAR or WAR
deployment.
I also updated the documentation.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Software consultant | Author of Seam in Action
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily
basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away
from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a week,
it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was
caught in the spam filters. Please don't hesitate to resend a message if
you feel that it did not reach my attention.
17 years, 1 month
Broken validation or broken booking example ?
by Max Rydahl Andersen
Hi,
In Tools we implemented long ago a validation based on docs and what you
guys told us in SF:
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBIDE-554
"All stateful session bean Seam components must have a method marked
@Remove @Destroy to ensure that Seam will remove the stateful bean when
the Seam context ends, and clean up any server-side state."
Recently we created the Project Example wizard and we wanted to use the
booking example as an example.
I was surprised to find that our validator complained about the code
because in there all @Stateful beans get the Error:
"Stateful component "<takeyourpick>List" must have a method marked
@Destroy
and that is true since the code looks like this:
@Remove
public void destroy() {}
where it should be:
@Remove @Destroy
public void destroy() {}
My question now is:
Is that validation rule broken (and the docs are wrong) or is the booking
example broken ?
Thanks,
--
/max
17 years, 1 month
