I haven't heard any objection from anyone so we are going to proceed
with the ISE for Async only case and will file another bug to track the
ISE for other scenarios for a future release.
Thanks
- Rajiv
On 1/9/13 1:45 PM, Rajiv Mordani wrote:
> Looking through the issues - I see that I sent this mail to the EG and
> no one else seems to have an opinion. I think that the thin wrapper
> approach that Mark mentions is what I would like to go with and throw
> the ISE. This allows re-use of the request and response objects while
> helping avoid bugs that occur from references. At this time I would
> like to restrict it to Async only and not encompass the wider use of
> ISE for request / response. We can file another bug to track that for
> a future release. Please let me know what you'll think.
>
> - Rajiv
>
> On 12/11/12 4:40 PM, Rajiv Mordani wrote:
>> All,
>> There is an issue filed in JIRA -
>> http://java.net/jira/browse/SERVLET_SPEC-6 on which we have had some
>> discussions. To summarize the issue - the semantics of
>> AsyncContext#getRequest and getResponse isn't absolutely clear after
>> a AsyncContext#complete() or dispatch(). I would like to close out
>> the issue one way or another and while I do see both the points of
>> view of Mark and Greg, I wanted to see what the rest of the EG
>> thought about the issue. I am inclined to clarify the behavior rather
>> than leaving it unspecified. Please let me know your thoughts.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> - Rajiv
>>
>