On Sep 16, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 16/09/2013 16:57, Mark Thomas wrote: >> The issue is with the lack of clarity from the EG with respect to >> ordering. I read section 8.2 one way but it is open to interpretation. > > I've dug back through the Servlet 3.0 mailing list. > > The text at the end of section 8.2 is aimed at the case where the same > SCI implementation exists in the container and the web app. It doesn't > appear that it was intended to affect ordering. > > There are a number of grey areas that were raised at the same time that > have not been resolved. Ordering was one. How to handle the case where > an SCI is provided by the container and the web app but excluded from > the web app via ordering was another. > > It certainly looks at this point as if the order is "anything you like". > Personally, I'd prefer something rather more deterministic.
Agreed. That's why I filed [1]. My understanding based on our previous conversations is that Tomcat *currently* orders SCIs according to the web-fragment ordering. Looking back on those conversations, what's not clear to me now is: 1) How does Tomcat *currently* order the groups of SCIs? Container before application or application before container? I *think* the answer is always application before container. 2) Does web-fragment ordering *currently* affect whether container SCIs come before application or vice versa? I *think* the answer is it does not. IMO, SCI ordering should be the same as web-fragment ordering. With that said, that's the suggestion I made in [1]. Unfortunately, there have been no comments from the EG yet. I know it will be a while before they start working on Servlet 3.2, but my hope was to get the EG involved on this particular issue early, so that some guidance can be given to 3.0 and 3.1 containers for how they might tweak their existing behavior (if possible, if the API doesn't change any) to provide consistent behavior across containers (JBoss also uses web-fragment ordering, and WebLogic and WebSphere appear to as well, but Jetty, GlassFish, and Resin use the order as returned from the ClassLoader). Consistency in Servlet 3.0 and 3.1 containers would be a high win, IMO. I'm trying to join the JCP as an individual process so that I can, hopefully, be a little more influential in this process. Unfortunately the process is onerous and it appears that I will not be "allowed" to join. (As an individual, my employer, who has absolutely no control or say over what I do in my spare time, is required to sign "Exhibit B" saying they won't claim ownership of my contributions, but my employer won't sign it because it's "unnecessary" and "serves no business purpose to us to enter into a legally binding agreement for you to do something that we don't care about on your own time.) It would be great if any existing JCP members could bring [1] to their attention and maybe get some people together for a discussion. N [1] https://java.net/jira/browse/SERVLET_SPEC-79
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
