Markus,
This has been discussed before in EG quite extensively. I can already promise you a big push back. As you should be aware of, we will not be able to introduce changes into JAX-RS that would break backward compatibility of the specification!
Marek Potociar, JAX-RS Specification Lead
> On 07 Oct 2015, at 08:30, Markus Karg <karg_at_quipsy.de> wrote:
>
> To stop further confusion, I will take this question with me in the JAX-RS Expert Group forum and discuss it with all vendors, and report the result here.
>
> -Markus Karg, JAX-RS Expert Group
>
>
>
> Von: cowwoc [mailto:cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org]
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 6. Oktober 2015 19:55
> An: users_at_jersey.java.net
> Betreff: [Jersey] Re: Discussion about re-opening a bug: JERSEY-2942
>
> +1
>
> At first glance, this definitely sounds unintuitive.
>
> Gili
>
> On 2015-10-06 3:29 AM, Grzesiek wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A couple of weeks ago I've created a bug ticket JERSEY-2942. <https://java.net/jira/browse/JERSEY-2942> Unfortunately this ticket has been closed quite fast with the status "Works as designed". But I believe this is a misunderstanding.
> In the issue's comments you can read a short discussion on this topic.
>
> Generally, IMO current Jersey behavior is quite ridiculous, because when having exactly matching method to serve a GET /api/users/1request - Jersey chooses method annotated with @DELETE. No other JAX-RS implementations that I'm aware of (Apache CXF and RESTeasy) behaves this way.
>
>
> But I know I could be wrong here. What do you think?
> Any insights are appreciated.
>
> Regards
> Greg
>