You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently there is a validation and only existent properties in portal.properties can be encoded.
The problem is that some of them are part of a comment or can be added as new composing them with a suffix + object's class name:
Example 1:
#web.server.protocol=https
Example 2:
#
# Entity level caching for a specific type of value object can be configured
# by using a property name that includes the value object's class name.
#
value.object.entity.cache.enabled.com.liferay.portal.kernel.model.Layout=true
value.object.entity.cache.enabled.com.liferay.portal.kernel.model.User=true
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Having the same issue but I really like this kind of validation!
I like some sanity check. Safes me from mistyping and from using "legacy" properties too.
It is true that currently only checks against master branch however I see this as a nice to have improvement to validate against the different portal versions.
Currently there is a validation and only existent properties in portal.properties can be encoded.
The problem is that some of them are part of a comment or can be added as new composing them with a suffix + object's class name:
Example 1:
#web.server.protocol=https
Example 2:
#
# Entity level caching for a specific type of value object can be configured
# by using a property name that includes the value object's class name.
#
value.object.entity.cache.enabled.com.liferay.portal.kernel.model.Layout=true
value.object.entity.cache.enabled.com.liferay.portal.kernel.model.User=true
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: