It gets even a bit more complicated. In Jetty 7, the API's have been changed to be "servlet 3 like", but not really servlet 3. Anyway, I have the continuations working on the branch, but a lot of unrelated system tests are failing and a bunch of the http-jetty unit tests are failing due to mock differences.
The new servlet 3 async things are nice. I'm definitely contemplating changing the API's a bit to leverage it better. I'd like to get the existing stuff working first though. I'll work on the unit tests a bit. Benson, any chance you can look at the failing system tests? Dan On Saturday 17 July 2010 12:08:18 pm Daniel Kulp wrote: > On Thursday 15 July 2010 9:53:28 pm Benson Margulies wrote: > > The continuation code is very different. I attached a first pass > > patch. It does not pass unit tests because I am completely flummoxed > > by mock, and I may not understand what's going on with the > > continuations. > > Digging into this a bit, it definitely gets a bit complicated. In Jetty > 7, the continuations will only work if you have the Jetty6 continuation > support jar OR if you have Servlet API 3.0 available. > > I'm leaning toward changing our servlet api jar from 2.5 to 3.0. However, > if I do that , it would make sense to rip all the continuation stuff out > of the Jetty module and promote it up to the AbstractHttpDestination > (providing I can detect if servlet 3 is avail and bypass on a 2.5 > container. Doing that would allow the continuations to work with any > Servlet 3 container such as the newer tomcats and such. That's > obviously a bit more work, but I think there is some value in it. > > Long term, there are some other interesting things that can be done with > Servlet 3. One example is a password handler for ws-sec that would > authenticate with the Servlet container. It could make UsernamePassword a > bit easier to use on certain containers. > > > Dan > > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Willem Jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > Daniel Kulp wrote: > > >> On Thursday 15 July 2010 2:33:26 pm Benson Margulies wrote: > > >>> The first part of the JIRA I filed above is easy: make a new project > > >>> that depends on jetty 7 instead of 6. > > >>> > > >>> I'm somewhat rusty after that. A profile in systests to use it? Where > > >>> is the default transport established (which I don't propose to > > >>> change) but what else is called for? > > >> > > >> Well, I guess there is a question of whether is makes sense to make > > >> 2.3 use Jetty 7 and have 2.2 remain at 6. I would actually be OK > > >> with that. How much would the CODE change? Is it just the > > >> dependencies or does it require a lot of code changes as well? > > > > > > Jetty 7 changed its package name to start with org.eclipse, so the code > > > could be changed a bit. > > > > > > Willem -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org http://dankulp.com/blog
