On 23/01/2015 13:42, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> I understand the IDE use case, but I'm not sure that
> WEB-INF/classes/META-INF/resources should be supported by the spec.
>
> While I would very much like it that we could establish exactly the same
> behaviour
> for any jar from WEB-INF/lib when it is expanded into WEB-INF/classes, I
> don't think
> that is actually possible, at least not for the general case of N jars.
I agree that that isn't possible but I am suggesting something subtly
different.
Treat WEB-INF/classes as if it were a single, expanded JAR.
If IDEs (or anyone else) want to expand multiple JARs into
WEB-INF/classes then they have the responsibility of dealing with any
conflicts.
> Specifically anything that uses web.xml fragments, service discovery,
> manifest data, or any other name clashes is going to have problems.
>
> I think the upside is small (and already covered by various development
> modes) and the potential down side is large.
I think the downside is manageable if the feature is carefully worded.
Overall, I still think this is worth doing but if the EG isn't convinced
I'm fine with that too.
Mark