Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-myfaces-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 38763 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2008 20:58:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Jul 2008 20:58:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 63420 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jul 2008 20:58:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-myfaces-dev-archive@myfaces.apache.org Received: (qmail 62982 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jul 2008 20:58:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@myfaces.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "MyFaces Development" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@myfaces.apache.org Received: (qmail 62971 invoked by uid 99); 8 Jul 2008 20:58:57 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:58:57 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lu4242@gmail.com designates 209.85.142.190 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.142.190] (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.190) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:58:06 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so891319tib.22 for ; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:58:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=Se4yUbt3J3XI159AIntnKvlcb9UAJCCT1PKssCj4/nQ=; b=ElJyUDugEP6lVgpdSkobSiJKby+hr34RuioFpcq5JHRk8CuNS6QR2sxRtMcqye+qSz J33xPQ5nThUG7ORTUkPDLBOLK7oXn8xePGmEY1J/CA8m+9SNiNhF2NnaLFmjqFqPw0u7 2llD8O8LQzMTE7+p7XI2h5w20NfC07YsXORbI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=padcLB+MTvQFIbQJ3TnTZXP02tFzN1MxfF8uqhayt3LL2CjSOe9OB67C15XVBWVe3g 1ViCUWL/goCZbftiogWgdx6TuL3bt+rmJ6EEcijMk/62UlmtHqbqbmNdVy3N9RL7nbHm otJ5itlIlLvpFlVMNn0ZKl+mySSGbBo29Ec5Q= Received: by 10.151.155.9 with SMTP id h9mr11000439ybo.130.1215550705524; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.8.12 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 13:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 15:58:25 -0500 From: "Leonardo Uribe" To: "MyFaces Development" Subject: Re: current state of MYFACES-434 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_30605_29293212.1215550705539" References: <48709899.6090509@ops.co.at> <4871C63B.3050407@ops.co.at> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_30605_29293212.1215550705539 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Leonardo Uribe wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:31 AM, Mario Ivankovits wrote: > >> Hi Leonardo, >> >> I tried to upgrade to the latest Tomahawk+Sandbox and now the >>> application fails to run properly as the TomahawkFacesContextWrapper does >>> the AddResource processing AND the ExtensionsFilter does the AddResource >>> processing. >>> >> >> The code in extension filter that do AddResource processing should be >> commented (this was added to disable this feature before). But before do >> that, we need to test several configurations of this feature >> (DefaultAddResource, NonBufferingAddResource, if servlet or portlet >> environment and other variations), because it could break old code. >> >> Ok, but it seems that Tomahawk head breaks every installation using >> DefaultAddResource which makes it impossible to test new things. >> >> My workaround is to use DojoAddResource, but that is far from being nice. >> >> If you would like us to test this thing it would be great if you could >> finish the work in ExtensionsFilter so that it really works as drop in >> replacement. >> > > Yes, I'll test this feature and complete it. > Hi I have found the response wrapping error (very nasty and difficult to understand). I have commited so right now and test several configurations successfully. regards Leonardo Uribe > > >> >> Thanks! >> Ciao, >> Mario >> > > ------=_Part_30605_29293212.1215550705539 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Leonardo Uribe <lu4242@gmail.com> wrote:


On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:31 AM, Mario Ivankovits <mario@ops.co.at> wrote:
Hi Leonardo,
I tried to upgrade to the latest Tomahawk+Sandbox and now the application fails to run properly as the TomahawkFacesContextWrapper does the AddResource processing AND the ExtensionsFilter does the AddResource processing.

The code in extension filter that do AddResource processing should be commented (this was added to disable this feature before). But before do that, we need to test several configurations of this feature (DefaultAddResource, NonBufferingAddResource, if servlet or portlet environment and other variations), because it could break old code.
Ok, but it seems that Tomahawk head breaks every installation using DefaultAddResource which makes it impossible to test new things.

My workaround is to use DojoAddResource, but that is far from being nice.

If you would like us to test this thing it would be great if you could finish the work in ExtensionsFilter so that it really works as drop in replacement.

Yes, I'll test this feature and complete it.

Hi

I have found the response wrapping error (very nasty and difficult to understand). I have commited so right now and test several configurations successfully.

regards

Leonardo Uribe
 
 

Thanks!
Ciao,
Mario


------=_Part_30605_29293212.1215550705539--