Hi Dan, I submitted the patch for this CXF-3768 in trunk. As this issue was raised for 2.4.2., I was thinking of integrating this patch into 2.4.x.
But after reading your question, I was not sure about how you thought. Would you prefer to keep the old behavior in 2.4? Technically, the behavior can be simply reverted to the old one by replacing one line in AbstractHTTPDestination. So, we could provide a configuration parameter to switch the behavior for 2.4 (I think we can make the default being the old behavior, as this is a bug fix, but we could make the default being the old behavior if this is considered not a bug but a change of behavior). For 2.5, I suppose we are supporting only the new corrected behavior, right? regards, aki > 3) While all this improved work is for 2.5, how hard would it be to create a > smaller patch for 2.4/2.3 that would allow it to accept either behavior? > Basically, generate the old behavior on those, but if they update to the > latest patches, they could still work with the new server. > > I guess I would definitely update the tests for the correct/new behavior. At > worst, I would just leave a single test or suite to test the "compatible" > behavior if we need to implement that. For the most part, I'm in the "spec > compliance and interopability trumps backwords compatibility" camp. It's > something that can be release noted. > > > -- > Daniel Kulp > dk...@apache.org > http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
