Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 79069 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2004 17:49:28 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Jan 2004 17:49:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 46736 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jan 2004 17:49:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 46693 invoked by uid 500); 14 Jan 2004 17:49:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 46679 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2004 17:49:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.gmx.net) (213.165.64.20) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Jan 2004 17:49:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 21090 invoked by uid 65534); 14 Jan 2004 17:49:19 -0000 Received: from a183069.studnetz.uni-leipzig.de (EHLO gmx.de) (139.18.183.69) by mail.gmx.net (mp010) with SMTP; 14 Jan 2004 18:49:19 +0100 X-Authenticated: #3483660 Message-ID: <4005815C.8040307@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:50:20 +0100 From: Joerg Heinicke User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: de-de, de, en-us, en-gb, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: [CVS] - Flow broken? References: <32904.10.0.0.5.1074070196.squirrel@ags01.agsoftware.dnsalias.com> <32908.10.0.0.5.1074075905.squirrel@ags01.agsoftware.dnsalias.com> <32999.10.0.0.5.1074078116.squirrel@ags01.agsoftware.dnsalias.com> <40055CE6.6000804@verizon.net> In-Reply-To: <40055CE6.6000804@verizon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 14.01.2004 16:14, Christopher Oliver wrote: > You're right. CallFunctionNode needed modification. Originally, I forgot > to check in that change. What do you mean by "it does not work with the > authentication-fw"?. I guess that means the flow implementation of the authentication-fw does not work. Have a look into the samples. Joerg