Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-struts-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 903 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2009 14:14:12 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Mar 2009 14:14:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 14019 invoked by uid 500); 4 Mar 2009 14:14:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-struts-user-archive@struts.apache.org Received: (qmail 13996 invoked by uid 500); 4 Mar 2009 14:14:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Struts Users Mailing List" Reply-To: "Struts Users Mailing List" Delivered-To: mailing list user@struts.apache.org Received: (qmail 13985 invoked by uid 99); 4 Mar 2009 14:14:03 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:14:03 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.0 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS,FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,WHOIS_MYPRIVREG X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 216.139.236.158 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:13:54 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Lerqn-0005xQ-LH for user@struts.apache.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:13:33 -0800 Message-ID: <22330799.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 06:13:33 -0800 (PST) From: Greg Lindholm To: user@struts.apache.org Subject: Re: Getting Servlets and Struts 2.1.6 to work together? In-Reply-To: <200903031835.28514.wesw@wantii.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: glindholm@yahoo.com References: <910719.38492.qm@web53602.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <7270d7cd0903031059v4b89f43cxaf394ff90c782d5a@mail.gmail.com> <22316030.post@talk.nabble.com> <200903031835.28514.wesw@wantii.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Wes Wannemacher wrote: > > On Tuesday 03 March 2009 14:31:36 Greg Lindholm wrote: >> Is this what you mean? >> >> >> struts2 >> *.action >> >> >> I previously had it as /* based on all the >> books >> and examples I was able to find. So is there no reason to include >> everything in the filter? >> > > I would also map /struts/* > > I noticed today as well that struts was picking up an action I had > defined, > even though I had no .action. I think I had seen it before intermittently, > but > wasn't able to nail it down. Truthfully, I've been using conventions so > long > that it strike me as odd at first. It was only because I was explicitly > trying > to take it out of the equation for something I was working on that I > noticed. > > -Wes > > -- > > Wes Wannemacher > Author - Struts 2 In Practice > Includes coverage of Struts 2.1, Spring, JPA, JQuery, Sitemesh and more > http://www.manning.com/wannemacher > > Why do you recommend mapping '/struts/*' to the struts filter? What uses this convention? Clearly there has been a change in behavior between 2.0.11 and 2.1.6, I'm wondering if this was intentional? Does the FilterDispatcher now assume that ever request it sees must be an action? If so this kind of feels wrong for a Filter, I expect filters to handle what they need to and pass everything else through to the next layer. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Getting-Servlets-and-Struts-2.1.6-to-work-together--tp22315139p22330799.html Sent from the Struts - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@struts.apache.org