watchlala at hotmail.com
Fri May 27 13:38:04 UTC 2011
I guess I just use WAApplication for everything... seeing as I how I don't understand any of the underlying architecture, I'm with whatever as long as I can still make an entry point ;)
> From: jfitzell at gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 14:10:22 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Seaside] WARegistry
> To: seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Philippe Marschall
> <philippe.marschall at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2011/5/27 Julian Fitzell <jfitzell at gmail.com>:
> >> Hi list,
> >> I'm playing with some ideas at the moment and someone asked whether we
> >> shouldn't get rid of WARegistry in the process.
> >> …
> > I would support that in favor of a dedicated session store and a
> > dedicated document store. The current solution with document handlers
> > and sessions stored is quite messy for example because sessions can be
> > looked by cookie but documents can't.
> Yep, definitely part of what I'm playing with (though slightly
> tangential). It wouldn't be hard to accommodate WARegistry as a
> concept (a Dispatcher with dynamic keys, maybe or maybe not expiring -
> but probably without cookie support) but I think WAApplication will
> end up not being a subclass if this idea works out.
> I'm still interested in hearing from the list more generally - if
> you're using WARegistry for anything, please speak up.
> seaside mailing list
> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the seaside