| Re: [servlet-dev] default context path |
On 25/11/2021 21:50, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 25/11/2021 21:32, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> Stuart,
>>
>> My understanding is that there are a lot of politics around optional
>> features and that we may need to seek permission to have them, which
>> is likely to be denied for this round.
>
> I'd argue it is already effectively optional since containers are
> permitted to override it and there are no constraints on when containers
> can and can't do that.
>
> I'm fine with not making it officially an optional feature. It was a
> suggestion to see what the community thought.
>
>> Surely there is something Tomcat can do to not override the default in
>> some specific situation that will allow it to pass the TCK?
>
> That would require significant code changes and introduce the
> possibility of start-up failures due to name clashes - something the
> Tomcat committers would like to avoid.
I think I misunderstood you when I wrote the above. Because Tomcat
doesn't read and then override the default, I was thinking in terms of
implementing support for the default. Thinking in terms of something
along the lines of "If we detect we are deploying the TCK WAR that tests
the default context feature, deploy it at the path it expects." that
would be doable but feels like an awful hack.
I'll discuss that with the Tomcat committers as it would mean the test
would remain enabled and relevant for those containers that have
implemented the feature.
Mark
> If excluding the test isn't an acceptable way forward (I think Stuart
> was reluctantly OK with that, my sense is that you are not) then Tomcat
> will continue as before - running the TCK expecting that one test to fail.
>
> Mark
>
>
>> On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 at 17:37, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas@xxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:sdouglas@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 18:49, Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>> On 24/11/2021 06:25, Greg Wilkins wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm not seeing the issue/conflict?
>> >
>> > If a webapp has a context path configured by the container,
>> then that
>> > wins. If it doesn't then the default context path is used.
>> >
>> > Or are you saying it is impossible to deploy a webapp in
>> tomcat without
>> > specifying the contextPath in a way that always overrules?
>>
>> Yes, that is what I was trying to say.
>>
>> Tomcat derives the context path from the file name. The short
>> version
>> (skipping over some detail) is that you can't have two files
>> with the
>> same name so you can't get context path conflicts.
>>
>> That puts Tomcat in the position where it is spec compliant
>> (container
>> configuration is allowed to override default-context-path) but
>> it can't
>> pass the TCK. Hence my minimum request to exclude the test.
>>
>> > On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 11:16, Stuart Douglas
>> <sdouglas@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sdouglas@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > <mailto:sdouglas@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sdouglas@xxxxxxxxxx>>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 at 23:03, Mark Thomas
>> <markt@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:markt@xxxxxxxxxx>>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I argued strongly against this feature when it was
>> proposed on the
>> > grounds it was under specified. It did not address
>> what happens
>> > if there
>> > is a conflict between the defined default context
>> path and web
>> > applications already installed on the server.
>> >
>> >
>> > We simply fail the deployment in this case. IMHO we
>> should not
>> > really define this as in WildFly (and I assume other
>> servers) you
>> > could have the same deployment name bound to different
>> virtual
>> > hosts, or you could be supporting multiple different
>> versions of an
>> > application at the same time.
>>
>> I was assuming that the deployments were targetting the same
>> virtual
>> host. I hadn't thought about versions (since the spec doesn't)
>> but in
>> this instance I'm considering the case where the versions are
>> the same too.
>>
>> I agree failing the deployment is reasonable. However, that
>> leaves a lot
>> of open questions. Do you fail one or both? If one, which one.
>> If you
>> restart the server will it be the same one?
>>
>> I looked though the 5.0 spec document and the feature isn't
>> mentioned
>> anywhere. The only documentation I could find for it was in the
>> schema
>> for web.xml.
>>
>> I dislike this lack of clarity but the lack of clarity is a
>> secondary
>> consideration.
>>
>> > I lost the argument not to include the feature but I
>> did obtain
>> > a change
>> > that stated words to the effect of "The configured
>> default
>> > context path
>> > may be overridden by container specific
>> configuration".
>> >
>> > The change was sufficient for Tomcat to completely
>> ignore the
>> > default
>> > context path feature on the basis that Tomcat has a
>> mechanism in
>> > place
>> > to define context path that was deliberately designed
>> to make
>> > conflicts
>> > impossible. This mechanism always applies and
>> therefore always
>> > overrides
>> > any default context path that may be set in web.xml.
>> >
>> >
>> > What do you mean by 'has a method in place to make
>> conflicts
>> > impossible'?
>>
>> See above where Greg asked a similar question.
>>
>> > The feature is currently tested by the TCK. That
>> TCK test
>> > assumes that
>> > the default context path will always be used. This
>> means it is
>> > impossible for Tomcat to pass the TCK.
>> >
>> > As a minimum, I would like to disable the default
>> context path
>> > test in
>> > the TCK. Users that wanted to test the feature would
>> be able to
>> > enable
>> > the test by using custom exclude list.
>> >
>> > Ideally, I'd like to see this feature deprecated and
>> eventually
>> > removed.
>> > I doubt there is sufficient support for that in the
>> community.
>> >
>> > Another possibility would be to explicitly document
>> support for the
>> > feature as optional.
>> >
>> >
>> > I am -1 on this, as IMHO it is a really useful feature.
>> It removes
>> > the need to strip versions from your archive names.
>>
>> ACK. Tomcat has a different way of solving that problem but I
>> appreciate
>> that having a solution to that use case is important.
>>
>> Just to confirm, -1 on all of the above options?
>>
>> > We have always supported the ability to set this via a
>> descriptor
>> > though, so I guess I am a bit biased in that respect.
>> We have
>> > supported this through a custom jboss-web.xml
>> descriptor, and
>> > through the standard application.xml mechanism for EAR
>> packaging.
>>
>> It is clear that there isn't support for deprecating /
>> removing the
>> feature and I can understand why that is the case.
>>
>> If all of the above options, including the minimal request,
>> aren't
>> acceptable, do you have any alternative suggestions on how to
>> solve
>> this? The constraint from the Tomcat side is that there is no
>> wish to
>> add support for default-context-path because of all the
>> ambiguity that
>> introduces.
>>
>>
>> I am ok with making it optional I guess, and not requiring a TCK
>> test. It does greatly diminish the usefulness of the feature though
>> if it is not properly portable.
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>>
>> Mark
>> _______________________________________________
>> servlet-dev mailing list
>> servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev
>> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> servlet-dev mailing list
>> servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev
>> <https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx>> CTO
>> http://webtide.com <http://webtide.com>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> servlet-dev mailing list
>> servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> servlet-dev mailing list
> servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev
_______________________________________________
servlet-dev mailing list
servlet-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/servlet-dev