[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Tapestry 3.0.2 + FriendlyURLs

Subject: Re: Tapestry 3.0.2 + FriendlyURLs
From: Paul Ferraro
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 17:17:02 -0800
I have to agree with Erik.

1.) In 3.1, customizable service url encoding/decoding is now part of the framework (see org.apache.tapestry.engine.ServiceEncoder in 3.1-alpha-1). To create a new 3.0.3 release with the wiki patch only to have the mechanism change again in 3.1 doesn't make sense.

2.) Patching and rebuilding the source yourself is not that hard. As outlined in the wiki, there are only 2 files that require patching in order for things to work as intended - a grand total of 4 lines of code. The rest of the code referenced in the wiki uses Tapestry's built-in extension points.

3.) As Erik continually points out :), there are *several* ways to modify the urls generated/interpreted by Tapestry 3.0. Overriding Tapestry's services as outlined in the wiki is just one of them. The servlet filter approach is another. Using Apache's mod_rewrite module is yet another. You will find many success stories from people using each of these approaches in the list archives...

However, I do think that a 3.0.3 release might be in order since:
1. A patch applied to the DatePicker in 3.0.2 introduced a bug where the calendar won't close automatically if no onchange event listener is specified.
2. The JanitorThread fix in 3.0.2 was not entirely correct.


Erik Hatcher wrote:

It goes like this....

Howard is heads-down on 3.1 and has not expressed interest in future 3.0.x releases.

    I am pleased with my servlet filter approach for "friendly" URLs.

I am supportive of a 3.0 release that includes friendly URL support internally, but I don't have an itch to scratch to make it happen myself. The approach in the FriendlyURL support versus what Howard has already done in 3.1 is completely different though - this makes it more of a stop-gap hack than a wise architectural addition.

If another committer wanted to push through a release with this embedded, this probably warrants it being called 3.1 and then what Howard has been calling 3.1 be renumbered (4.0?! Howard doesn't like that idea though). Again, I'm supportive of it but have no time or interest in doing it myself.


On Mar 5, 2005, at 5:46 AM, Massimo wrote:

On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:13:18 -0500, Anastasios Angelidis
<[email protected]> wrote:

It's not hard to do at all...

Follow: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-tapestry/FriendlyUrls

If that's all that easy i don't understand why developers could not
import it in the core for 3.0 tree ?

We all can see it's a recurrent demand from the community and we all
know how friendly URL are valuable from a search engine bot

I think all can understand Eric point of view about doing it with
filters but the question "If that's all that easy why not?" still

Don you tend to agree ?


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]----
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]----
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>