I just found https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-3403, however this still adds a compatibility layer to support Sling on Servlet 2.x. Removing this should be fairly straightforward looking at https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-engine/commit/8e5d434d1314141dc2a61f62d7595d3e85dc4da1. However there may be minor differences in handling compared to the one in Sling. The question is to which degree we should test with other servlet engines apart from Jetty? Konrad
> On 20. Nov 2024, at 17:24, Konrad Windszus <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Carsten, > Sounds good to clean up before doing the upgrade. Let us track the effort in > 2 separate JIRA issues for Multipart-POST and parameter handling. Then we can > collect some entry points to code in them to give a better overview on the > actual effort. > @Carsten: Can you create those ticket and link them to > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-10000? > > Thanks, > Konrad > > >> On 20. Nov 2024, at 07:26, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Trying to bring this old thread to life again :) >> >> It seems that most of us agree on these two things: we should some support >> Jakarta Servlet for Sling and whatever we do, it should allow to continue to >> run existing code without changes. >> >> However, before we get there, we should make us of Servlet 3 as this will >> most likely make the Jakarata support much easier. >> >> As Sling was built on top of Servlet 2, it started to use commons-fileupload >> for handling multipart post requests. We should replace this with using the >> Servlet 3 parts API. This should be straight forward. >> >> In addition, we have a lot of legacy handling for request parameters >> especially around encoding in Sling Engine - this is pretty complicated code >> which in theory shouldn't be necessary anymore and we could 100% rely on the >> servlet engine. >> >> It would be great if there is someone volunteering to look into these. I see >> at least the first one as a prerequisite. >> >> Regards >> Carsten >> >> On 09.10.2023 15:37, Robert Munteanu wrote: >>> Hi, >>> +1 from me on moving to Jakarta Servlet, for the reasons you outlined. >>> On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 14:08 +0200, Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >>>> Now I totally agree that this must come with nearly zero changes >>>> required for our users. That's why I only suggested solutions where >>>> this >>>> should be true. >>> On a related topic, there are source-level solutions for migrating to >>> jakarta.servlet, e.g. [1]. >>> These would be complementary to the eclipse transformer, which looks >>> like a nice fit as it has both bnd and maven plugins. >>> Thanks, >>> Robert >>> [1]: >>> https://docs.openrewrite.org/recipes/java/migrate/jakarta/javaxservlettojakartaservlet >> >> -- >> Carsten Ziegeler >> Adobe >> [email protected] >> >
