MT> On 01/09/2015 01:15, Shing Wai Chan wrote:
SWC> If this is a Servlet 4.0 feature, there is most likely a Servlet
SWC> TCK assertion for this. Mark, can you help us understand why you
SWC> are taking such a strong position against it as a representative
SWC> for the hugely important Tomcat community?
>>>>> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 19:19:45 +0100, Mark Thomas <markt_at_apache.org> said:
MT> As I have said previously on this thread, web applications are meant
MT> to be independent of the context path at which they are
MT> deployed. Anything that encourages web application developers to
MT> think that they can code to a specific context path is a bad idea.
May I paraphrase the spirit of your position as "don't make it any
easier than absolutely necessary to do bad things." While I agree with
the spirit of your position, in this case I think that spirit is trumped
by several factors, in decreasing order of importance.
1. many containers already offer this in a proprietary fashion
2. it sure would be convenient to offer it as a standard
3. we can put it at the bottom of a priority list, allowing the
preservation of out-of-webapp context-root specification
4. we can name the XML element sufficiently obviously to make it clear
the priority is below other ways of specifying the context-root.
SWC> Yes, we should allow the container to override the context root
SWC> configuration. We can discuss more on the XML element name once we
SWC> agree to have this feature.
MT> Then as I stated above, Tomcat will *always* override whatever is set
MT> here - effectively ignoring it. I have no wish to deal with the
MT> inevitable conflicts that will result when multiple applications all
MT> want to be deployed with a context path of "".
This is a good point. What do you do in Tomcat if multiple apps are
attempted to be deployed with the same context root, even when it is ""?
Ed
--
| edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
| 45 Business days til JavaOne 2015
| 60 Business days til DOAG 2015