t see
> customizing the built-in rules to be a priority, or frankly, of any great
> value."
>
> I can tell you the URL scheme of Tapestry would not work at all for some of
> the apps I've built.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Howard Lewis Ship&q
;Tapestry users"
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 2:38 AM
Subject: Re: new features in 5.0.11
It's nice that you think that.
The reality is that almost every application I've worked on or
consulted for had a subset of pages that needed to be protected via
HTTPS and the remainder could
2008 9:02 PM
> To: Tapestry users
> Subject: Re: new features in 5.0.11
>
> Defining secure access via HTTPS is a high level architectural decision.
> Seldom is one going to want to do that by annotation.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Angelo Chen"
It's nice that you think that.
The reality is that almost every application I've worked on or
consulted for had a subset of pages that needed to be protected via
HTTPS and the remainder could operate via HTTP.
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:01 PM, kranga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Defining secure ac
Defining secure access via HTTPS is a high level architectural decision.
Seldom is one going to want to do that by annotation.
- Original Message -
From: "Angelo Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:07 AM
Subject: t5: new features in 5.0.11
Hi,
As usual
