beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlin Rogers <carlin.rog...@gmail.com>
Subject Question about BEEHIVE-1024
Date Fri, 06 Jan 2006 06:22:12 GMT
Hey Rich,

Hope your work is going well!

I have a question about svn revision 356056 (
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?rev=356056&view=rev ) checked in as a fix
for BEEHIVE-1024. It seems that it changed the behavior of
PageFlowRequestProcessor.processMapping() and how we handle an unknown
action. With this change, the code path for an unknown action in
processMapping() fails the new check to see if it is in the globalApp
(...globalApp.findActionConfig(path) != null). We drop to the else statement
and into a call to processUnresolvedAction() which uses the
DefaultExceptionsHandler class and eventually writes out the HTML of our
action not found error message directly to the response. I think this looks
OK. However, having the error message written to the response may not be the
desired behavior for something like a portal using a call to
PageFlowUtils.strutsLookup(). What do you think?

If we leave the fix as is, could we use the
PageFlowRequestWrapper.isScopedLookup() condition to determine if this is
from strutsLookup() or not before calling processUnresolvedAction(). I.E. do
something different for an unknown action in a strutsLookup()? Just curious.

Thanks,
Carlin

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message