That still wouldn't solve the validation issue. If the user doesn't input anything, validation will fail.
Uli Am Di, 2.09.2008, 22:39, schrieb Carl Crowder: > Why not just @Persist the password value in the session, only > overwriting the value if the user submits something? That way the value > gets kept but at the same time the clientside doesn't have the plaintext > password. > > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo wrote: >> Em Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:57:19 -0300, Martijn Brinkers >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu: >>> really distrust applications that do not hash passwords. The mentioned >>> problem can be solved my making a distinction between adding a new user >>> (which requires a password) and editing a user (allow blank password >>> indicating that the password should not be changed). >> >> It would be really nice if PasswordField did not set the corresponding >> property value nor validate it when the the user leaves the field empty. >> I think it would solve all (or almost all) the issues listed in this >> thread. >> >> Thiago >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
