On 6 April 2016 11:02:43 BST, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Mark Thomas <markt_at_apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I think we need to follow the same rules as for the path of the
>original
>> request. That means we'll need some new request attributes. Something
>like:
>>
>> javax.servlet.forward.mapping
>> and
>> javax.servlet.include.mapping
>>
>
>Sounds perfect to me.
>
>
>
>>
>> If folks think this is sensible, I can add implementing this to my
>TODO
>> list for the next Tomcat milestone so folks can try it out.
>>
>> If we can iron out the isImplicit() and the more useful
>> path/pattern/something return value I can include those updates to.
>>
>
>With regards to the isImplicit() method I think it could be something
>like
>this then:
>
>public interface Mapping {
> MappingMatch getMappingMatch(); // See Servlet spec 12.2
> String getMatch();
> String getPatern();
> boolean isImplicit(); // see Servlet spec 12.2.1
>}
>
>Definition of MappingMatch:
>
>public enum MappingMatch {
> PATH, EXTENSION, CONTEXT_ROOT, DEFAULT, EXACT, UNKNOWN
>}
Do we even need isImplict ()? What is the use case for it?
>Btw, I noticed a typo or small oversight went into the proposed Mapping
>interface. There's now a method called getMappingType(), which
>originally
>returned the enum called MappingType. The spec lead changed this before
>committing it to MappingMatch, but my guess is he forgot to adjust the
>getter as well. That probably should become getMappingMatch(), if that
>makes sense?
Ack.
Mark
>
>Kind regards,
>Arjan Tijms
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Stuart
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:19 PM, arjan tijms
><arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I wrote a small blog post about the new API here:
>> >>
>>
>http://arjan-tijms.omnifaces.org/2016/04/servlet-40s-mapping-api-previewed-in.html
>> >>
>> >> I think we need to discuss the "implicit" mapping. As by my
>experiments,
>> >> Tomcat never seems to return it, even when calling a *.jsp page.
>It's
>> >> debatable if implicit even is a separate mapping. I mean, can't we
>have
>> an
>> >> implicit path mapping, implicit extension mapping etc? Maybe it's
>> better to
>> >> have an isImplicit() method on the Mapping type?
>> >>
>> >> I also got some feedback regarding the getPattern() method. People
>> (also)
>> >> seem to want the pattern in such a way that they can use it right
>away
>> in
>> >> their code. E.g. for path mapping the pattern would now be e.g.
>> "/path/*",
>> >> but it would also be desirable to have a "/path/" returned.
>> >>
>> >> Another comment concerned the Default mapping. It's now e.g.:
>> >>
>> >> Default (fallback) mapping
>> >> http://localhost:8080/servlet4/doesnotexist
>> >>
>> >> Mapping match:DEFAULT
>> >> Match value:/
>> >> Pattern:/
>> >>
>> >> Should the match value be "/" here, or perhaps better be
>> "/doesnotexist"?
>> >>
>> >> What do you think?
>> >>
>> >> Kind regards,
>> >> Arjan Tijms
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 9:42 AM, arjan tijms
><arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Great, thanks!
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Greg Wilkins
><gregw_at_webtide.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It is on the todo list.... but probably at least 2 weeks away.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> cheers
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 31 March 2016 at 09:54, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Greg, Stuart,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Would it be possible for you to also implement the getMapping
>API
>> that
>> >>>>> Mark implemented for Tomcat? That may help ironing out some
>> potential issues
>> >>>>> as Mark mentioned
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Kind regards,
>> >>>>> Arjan Tijms
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Greg Wilkins
><gregw_at_webtide.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> All,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Jetty's stable releases (9.3.x) have had PushBuilder support
>for a
>> few
>> >>>>>> months and it is actively being used by our HTTP2 adopters. It
>was
>> this
>> >>>>>> usage that found the race condition issues and transient push
>issues
>> >>>>>> discussed elsewhere.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Other that that, no complaints so far. However, this is not
>> against a
>> >>>>>> servlet 4.0 API but rather our own packaging of the same API.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> cheers
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 31 March 2016 at 08:38, Stuart Douglas
><sdouglas_at_redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I have initial PushBuilder support implemented in Undertow
>master,
>> >>>>>>> however it is not part of any release yet. It should be
>possible to
>> >>>>>>> use it in Wildfly by simply replacing the existing Undertow
>and
>> >>>>>>> Servlet API jars.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Stuart
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:02 PM, arjan tijms <
>> arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Mark Thomas
><markt_at_apache.org>
>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Do you mean this one:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>>
>http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails|org.apache.tomcat|tomcat-servlet-api|9.0.0.M4|jar
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> All the Tomcat 9.0.0.M4 JARs should be in Maven central
>along
>> with
>> >>>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>> full installer as well.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Perfect, thanks!
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> A question is how to proceed with this feature for other
>Servlet
>> >>>>>>>>>> containers, but that's probably best discussed at the
>Servlet EG
>> >>>>>>>>>> list.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> The EG members should be watching here...
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> You're right, they should be.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I think the first step is for other containers to implement
>the
>> >>>>>>>>> proposal
>> >>>>>>>>> so we can iron out any ambiguities in the spec and any
>> >>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >>>>>>>>> issues we didn't hit in Tomcat.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Sounds like a very good plan indeed. I guess Jetty and
>Undertow as
>> >>>>>>>> active
>> >>>>>>>> open source containers would be good initial candidates
>here?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>> >>>>>>>> Arjan Tijms
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Mark
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>> Arjan Tijms
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Mark Thomas
><markt_at_apache.org
>> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:markt_at_apache.org>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Any feedback on this?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Mark
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On 17/03/2016 10:39, arjan tijms wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> > Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > That's really great! I'll do some testing over the
>weekend
>> >>>>>>>>>> and let
>> >>>>>>>>>> you know.
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > Thanks again
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > Kind regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>> > Arjan Tijms
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Mark Thomas
>> >>>>>>>>>> <markt_at_apache.org
>> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:markt_at_apache.org>
>> >>>>>>>>>> > <mailto:markt_at_apache.org <mailto:markt_at_apache.org>>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > On 07/03/2016 22:32, arjan tijms wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Mark Thomas
>> >>>>>>>>>> <markt_at_apache.org <mailto:markt_at_apache.org>
>> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:markt_at_apache.org
>> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:markt_at_apache.org>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > <mailto:markt_at_apache.org
><mailto:markt_at_apache.org>
>> >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:markt_at_apache.org <mailto:markt_at_apache.org>>>>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > I can look at implementing this in Tomcat
>if
>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>> would
>> >>>>>>>>>> be any use.
>> >>>>>>>>>> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > That would be a great step for sure.
>> >>>>>>>>>> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > For me personally using it for Mojarra is a
>big use
>> >>>>>>>>>> case,
>> >>>>>>>>>> and its tests
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > run primarily against GlassFish, but I could
>sure
>> >>>>>>>>>> build a
>> >>>>>>>>>> personal test
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > bed based on Tomcat (in fact, we already have
>this
>> >>>>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>>>> OmniFaces ;)).
>> >>>>>>>>>> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > > So if you can look at this that would be great
>:)
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > I've implemented this in 9.0.0.M4 available
>here:
>> >>>>>>>>>> > http://tomcat.apache.org/download-90.cgi
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > As always, feedback appreciated.
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> > Mark
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --
>> >>>>>> Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> CTO http://webtide.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> CTO http://webtide.com
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>