>
> It may be better to let developers extend the grizzly test functionality rather than trying to abstract support for SSL?
>
> Currently the GrizzlyWebTestContainer is private but it could be made protected with the ability to extend it to modifying the GrizzlyWebServer and ServletAdapter. Then the developer could hook up their own extension of GrizzlyWebTestContainerFactory.
>
> Note to Pavel: since the WebAppDescriptor is immutable there is no need to make copies of the state with individual private fields. One can just copy the reference to the WebAppDescriptor.
That makes sense, and I would agree it would likely be easier then trying to abstract support for SSL on all containers. This would also handle my special case of needing to specify a name for the spring security filter..
So, we would need some way for the factory to know to call my GrizzlyWebTestContainer..
thanks,
-jr