Just to help mailing list cross-referencing - this thread continues 
here[1] as "Regarding ISIS-254".

[1] http://isis.markmail.org/message/qmuw25gd4rfapud7

On 2 Sep 2012 at 13:08, Dan Haywood wrote:

> On 2 September 2012 12:44, Giedrius Grazevicius <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Currently looking into the binary support. I've added simple byte[]
> > support in a Wicket viewer (treats the property as a file that can be
> > uploaded). Changes can be seen here:
> > https://github.com/INightmare/apache-isis/commits/ISIS-254
> >
> > Thanks for taking this forward.  Had a quick review of those commits,
> looks like you're progressing fine.  (Nice to see for me, since I've given
> you zero guidance around the code base ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> > Now to figure out a way to make Wicket treat such property a bit
> > differently than other values (that is prevent it from accessing it,
> > unless user specifically requested it).
> >
> 
> The normal way to do this would be to define a facet for this (if there
> isn't a suitable one), and a corresponding facet factory, then registered
> into ProgrammingModelFacetsJava5.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Also:
> >
> > When trying to edit newly created object in Wicket viewer with
> > DataNucleus as ObjectStore, the following exception occurs:
> > http://pastebin.com/4tCiCqiZ
> > Am I doing something wrong or is this a known problem?
> >
> 
> I think this might be a semi-known problem.  Jeroen and I were fixing a
> problem to do with Wicket and JDO on Friday evening, whereby a newly
> persisted object was then persisted twice if we immediately invoked an
> action on it.  The problem was that Wicket was serializing the state of the
> object into the page prior to the transaction actually executing (causing
> the adapter's state to move to transient to persistent).  My suspicion is
> that this is the same problem.
> 
> It's on the list to look at then...
> 
> Cheers
> Dan
> 

Reply via email to