|
|
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.
Paul
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.
Erik
On Mar 5, 2005, at 5:46 AM, Massimo wrote:
On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:13:18 -0500, Anastasios Angelidis
<voodoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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
perspective.
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
remain.
Don you tend to agree ?
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|