Solved the problem with one very very nasty hack, but if somebody interested:
i commented the ioc binding for PropertyAccess implementation in org.apache.tapestry5.ioc.services.TapestryIOCModule // binder.bind(PropertyAccess.class, PropertyAccessImpl.class); then i introduced an own implementation in my app via binder.bind(PropertyAccess.class, SpringPropertyAccessImpl.class); as i said, BeanUtils from spring3 detect unvoid setters flawlessly. Well, my solution is ugly. I have to keep own version of tapsetry-ioc in my maven repo. But it is much much better than changing the code in many projects that use setter chaining or introducing wrapper classes around the domain objects. I'm quite newbie in tapestry ioc. Is there any clean way to introduce my own PropertyAccess implementation without hacking into source code? Is there any possibility of reconsidering setter detection in future releases? -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/T5.1-Setters-returning-value-tp28288048p28328043.html Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
