It would appear that even with this code to check the version number,
without a T5.2.0 equivalent for the RegexAuthorizer service to allow some
variation on:
("com/orientimport/.*\\.((css)|(js)|(jpg)|(jpeg)|(png)|(gif)|(html)|(ico)|(s
wf)|(xml))$")
... to grant access to resources the t5easyfckEditor won't work. It's a
pity no workaround seems to be available for this, unless I am missing
something.
Regards,
Jim.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ville Virtanen [mailto:ville.virta...@cerion.fi]
Sent: 31 May 2010 18:00
To: users@tapestry.apache.org
Subject: Re: Asset protection and upgrade notes
Also this choice forces us library writers to either
a) support two separate deployment jars for different T5 versions
b) fork the code depending on the T5 version
So my approach is probably this:
public static void
contributeClasspathAssetAliasManager(MappedConfiguration<String, String>
configuration,
@Inject @Symbol(FckEditorConstants.EDITOR_CONTEXT) String
location,
@Inject @Symbol(SymbolConstants.TAPESTRY_VERSION) String
t5Version)
{
if(!location.equalsIgnoreCase("easyfck") ||
getTapestryVersion(t5Version) < 5106) {
configuration.add(location, "com/orientimport/easyfck/js");
}
}
private static int getTapestryVersion(String version) {
return Integer.parseInt(version.replaceAll("\\.", ""));
}
Not elegant, not good code (assumes something about the future version
numbers..), not maintainable in long run, if these dicisions will keep
popping up.
Also the automatic classpath asset addition works for this library only if
the user who uses the library hasn't decided to use custom url for his/hers
fck editor. It should not be depended on the TAG prefix?
My 2c,
- Ville
Ville Virtanen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been tracking the documentation to understand the change in asset
> protection, but haven't found anything useful.
>
> I've checked the upgrade guide from svn (last update 4 days ago):
>
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tapestry/tapestry5/trunk/src/site/apt/upgrade.a
pt?revision=948226&view=markup
>
> But really it only mentions the no-slashes-in-virtual-folders restriction.
> Where is the asset protection part or am I looking from wrong sources?
>
> Also, what is the rationale behind removing library specific versions?
> Even if the 3rd party library doesn't change any resources browsers are
> forced to download all assets again when updating the main program.
> Technical challenges I presume?
>
> Anyhow, the info on asset protection is very important for me, or at least
> just plain cold "We're working on it and have no eta.". (Then I know to
> stop reading through sources.)
>
> - Ville
>
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Asset-protection-and-upgrade-notes-tp28732735p28733093
.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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
