Mailing-List: contact beehive-user-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Beehive Users" <beehive-user@incubator.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: question about inheritance
From: Adam Jenkins <mail@adamjenkins.net>
Reply-To: mail@adamjenkins.net
To: Beehive Users <beehive-user@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <428E7EAA.3020307@bea.com>
References: <1116538681.8943.15.camel@main.adamjenkins.net>
	 <428D1DEE.8030805@bea.com> <1116614823.8943.34.camel@main.adamjenkins.net>
	 <428E3617.7080502@bea.com> <1116616688.8943.40.camel@main.adamjenkins.net>
	 <428E4534.8000108@bea.com> <1116628385.10012.2.camel@main.adamjenkins.net>
	 <428E7EAA.3020307@bea.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 06:25:20 +1000
Message-Id: <1116707120.10012.8.camel@main.adamjenkins.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Rich,

I've written my own LoginHandler and registered it in
beehive-netui-config.xml.  I was just wondering about the 
method:

public void login(final FlowControllerHandlerContext context, final
String username, final String password)

How do I have this method called?  Do I call it directly (in which case,
where do I get the reference to the current login handler from?), or is
there a framework specific way to activate a 'login' action, maybe
through an annotation or something?

Do you know of any examples of using a LoginHandler and the
'loginRequired' annotation anywhere?

Cheers
Adam

On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 18:19 -0600, Richard Feit wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> You're right -- it should return null (so it acts like 
> HttpServletRequest.getUserPrincipal()).  I'll update the javadoc for this.
> 
> Thanks,
> Rich
> 
> Adam Jenkins wrote:
> 
> >Hi Again Rich,
> >
> >I'm writing an implementation of the LoginHandler to solve my
> >requirements.  The method getUserPrincipal(), should I return null from
> >that method if the user hasn't yet logged in?  The javadoc doesn't say
> >and there are no exceptions signified to use.
> >
> >Cheers
> >Adam
> >
> >On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 14:14 -0600, Richard Feit wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Thank you!  :)
> >>Hopefully you'll continue to find that it's got what you need, and where 
> >>it doesn't, we'd love to get bugs/feature-requests, or better yet, to 
> >>have people get involved.
> >>
> >>The questions are great for us to hear -- they give us a sense for where 
> >>we've done things well and where there are holes... and where we need to 
> >>fill in the docs.
> >>
> >>Oh, and if it *is* good, getting the word out definitely helps the 
> >>project.  :)
> >>
> >>Rich
> >>
> >>Adam Jenkins wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>><explitative> awesome!
> >>>
> >>>Wow, talk about spoilt for choice! :)  Each of those answers not only
> >>>help, but that's fantastic information to know for other uses.
> >>>
> >>>A big well done to all the people that worked on this.  My entire team
> >>>(all fairly senior developers) are continually blown away by not just
> >>>the things that beehive does, but that lateral thinking that went into
> >>>it's creation.
> >>>
> >>>It's good to see programming of this calibre.  Very inspiring to others
> >>>in the field.  Cheers for all the hard work and such a quick response to
> >>>my questions.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks again
> >>>Adam
> >>>
> >>>On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 13:10 -0600, Richard Feit wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Hi Adam,
> >>>>
> >>>>These are great questions.  A few responses; hopefully one or more will 
> >>>>help you.
> >>>>
> >>>>   - You can override beforeAction()/afterAction() on either the base 
> >>>>class or the derived class.  This is a brute-force way to run code 
> >>>>before/after every action.  In the beforeAction method, you could even 
> >>>>write code to read the action method's annotations through reflection, 
> >>>>and look for a custom annotation that you wrote to determine whether to 
> >>>>do the check and throw an exception if necessary.
> >>>>
> >>>>   - We do have the idea of "action interceptors".  An action 
> >>>>interceptor is a class that can be configured to run before/after a 
> >>>>particular action, or all actions, or all actions in a particular page 
> >>>>flow.  It can do things like change/cancel the destination URI, throw an 
> >>>>exception, or "inject" an entire nested page flow to run before the 
> >>>>action.  These are registered in WEB-INF/beehive-netui-config.xml.  
> >>>>There's a bit of doc on this at 
> >>>>http://incubator.apache.org/beehive/pageflow/config/beehive-netui-config.html#pageflow-action-interceptors 
> >>>>.  But what you *really* want is a "named" action interceptor that you 
> >>>>can refer to in an annotation.  Short of that, you could write an 
> >>>>interceptor that would use the reflection/annotation-based approach I 
> >>>>mentioned above.  But read on...
> >>>>
> >>>>   - In this specific case our annotations can help you do what you 
> >>>>want.  If you set the 'loginRequired' attribute on an action (or on the 
> >>>>page flow class, in @Jpf.Controller, which can be overridden on a 
> >>>>per-action basis), then a NotLoggedInException will be thrown if you hit 
> >>>>the action without being logged in.  By default, "being logged in" means 
> >>>>that getUserPrincipal() returns a non-null value on the request; 
> >>>>however, you can plug in your own login behavior.  To do this, you'd 
> >>>>implement org.apache.beehive.netui.pageflow.handler.LoginHandler, and 
> >>>>register your class under <login-handler> in 
> >>>>WEB-INF/beehive-netui-config.xml. 
> >>>>
> >>>>Hope this helps -- let me know if you need more info on any of this.
> >>>>
> >>>>Rich
> >>>>
> >>>>Adam Jenkins wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi Rich,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Thanks for the quick response.  That's excellent info, it answers about
> >>>>>3/4 of what I was after.  I have one more small question about executing
> >>>>>the assertion.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Lets say I have a controller (and my syntax could be wrong here, I'm
> >>>>>still getting my head around beehive, but I think it get's what I'm
> >>>>>trying to achieve accross):
> >>>>>
> >>>>>@Jpf.Controller(
> >>>>>	simpleActions={
> >>>>>		@Jpf.Forward(name="not_authenticated" path="login.do")
> >>>>>	}	
> >>>>>	catches={
> >>>>>		@Jpf.Catch(type=UserNotLoggedInException.class method="forceLogin")
> >>>>>	}
> >>>>>)
> >>>>>public clas Base extends PageFlowController{
> >>>>>
> >>>>>	private void assertUserLoggedIn(...) throws UserNotLoggedInException{
> >>>>>		//do some stuff to make sure the user is validated.
> >>>>>	}
> >>>>>
> >>>>>	public Forward forceLogin(...){
> >>>>>		return new Forward("not_authenticated");
> >>>>>	}
> >>>>>}
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Now, I want to call assertUserLoggedIn before any action is executed and
> >>>>>I want it on almost every action in the system (except of course the
> >>>>>'login' action).  I would normally do this in a superclass of all the
> >>>>>struts actions I used.  That is, I would call assertUserLoggedIn in the
> >>>>>super class struts action and, if the exception was thrown it would be
> >>>>>handled by the global exception handling.  If no exception was thrown, I
> >>>>>would then call an abstract method that is implemented in the subclass
> >>>>>that actually does the processing and returns the forward.  That was my
> >>>>>way of enforcing that the first thing every action did was check and
> >>>>>make sure that the user was in fact logged in.  So, in a nut shell, is
> >>>>>there a way to call a common assertion or set of assertions (or set of
> >>>>>methods for that matter) from a whole set of actions without actually
> >>>>>specifying the assertions at the start of every action (think
> >>>>>crosscutting).  How would you recommend achieving something like that in
> >>>>>beehive?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Cheers
> >>>>>Adam
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 17:14 -0600, Richard Feit wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hi Adam,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Beehive does support inheritance in page flows (and in controls, for 
> >>>>>>that matter).  The important point for page flows is that the base and 
> >>>>>>derived @Jpf.Controller annotations are merged.   So if you have the 
> >>>>>>following hierarchy:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  @Jpf.Controller(
> >>>>>>      nested=true,
> >>>>>>      catches={
> >>>>>>          @Jpf.Catch(type=Exception1.class, method="handleException1")
> >>>>>>      }
> >>>>>>  )
> >>>>>>  public class Base extends PageFlowController ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  @Jpf.Controller(
> >>>>>>      catches={
> >>>>>>          @Jpf.Catch(type=Exception2.class, method="handleException2")
> >>>>>>      }
> >>>>>>  )
> >>>>>>  public class Derived1 extends Base ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  @Jpf.Controller(
> >>>>>>      catches={
> >>>>>>          @Jpf.Catch(type=Exception3.class, method="handleException3")
> >>>>>>      }
> >>>>>>  )
> >>>>>>  public class Derived2 extends Derived1 ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>...then the @Jpf.Controller annotation for Derived2 is virtually this:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  @Jpf.Controller(
> >>>>>>      nested=true,
> >>>>>>      catches={
> >>>>>>          @Jpf.Catch(type=Exception1.class, method="handleException1")
> >>>>>>          @Jpf.Catch(type=Exception2.class, method="handleException2")
> >>>>>>          @Jpf.Catch(type=Exception3.class, method="handleException3")
> >>>>>>      }
> >>>>>>  )
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Additionally, action methods, exception handler methods, and annotated 
> >>>>>>control fields are all inherited as long as they're not private.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Does this answer your question?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Rich
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Adam Jenkins wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>       
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>            
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hi All,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I'm starting out with beehive and wondering about inheritance.  With
> >>>>>>>struts apps, I would put security assertions in a super class of all
> >>>>>>>actions and redirect any exceptions thrown to the appropriate page.  Is
> >>>>>>>there a way to do similar in beehive or do you have to use shared flows
> >>>>>>>for common stuff like that.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Cheers
> >>>>>>>Adam
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>    
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>         
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>              
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >
> >
> >  
> >