Hi Valentin, thanks, that sounds right to me, iiuc. :) Lin
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Valentin Mahrwald <[email protected]> wrote: > > That's only too true. What I thought actually thought about when I wrote it > was to implement the webbundle handler through an extension to the > BundleConverter. (So option 2) > > But actually since then I must confess it looks more natural to do it the > other way around. So the WabConverter service would be a new export from a > new RFC 66 bundle that is driven by the application converter > implementation, which would add functionality such as reading out the > context root from an application.xml if present. > > Sounds about right? >
