On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:41:25 -0400, Lutz Hühnken""
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why would you not want to use an external mechanism? Is it not rather
a feature of the framework to be "SSL agnostic"? I think more often
than not people would keep, for example, security and access right
aspects out
What I don't understand: in an earlier posting you wrote:
On 5/29/06, Josip Gracin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
scheme, but relying only on Tapestry mechanisms, i.e. not using Tomcat etc.?
[...]
Why would you not want to use an external mechanism? Is it not rather
a feature of the framewor
Kevin Menard wrote:
What we (or at least I) want is to deal with this at the page class
level. The idea would be a page class can either be marked as secure or
not and the framework would then take care of rewriting URLs with the
appropriate scheme. Such a system would allow for a nice hierar
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:30:38 -0400, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hard for me to have an opinion, but if there is a jira issue open for it
I
will try to remember to fix what inflexibility is being created with the
current system.
I'm stretching my brain a bit here, but I think w
Hard for me to have an opinion, but if there is a jira issue open for it I
will try to remember to fix what inflexibility is being created with the
current system.
On 6/19/06, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:41:43 -0400, Giampaolo Tomassoni
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:41:43 -0400, Giampaolo Tomassoni
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm really getting pissed about this (and feeling more and more stupid
after each new failed attempt). Especially since the constraint to mix
HTTP and HTTPS pages has been forced upon me with the explanation th
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
You may develop a filter to be put on top of the tapestry servlet,
I'll check it out. Thanks for your time, I appreciate it!
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-ma
