This is done now (in Git). On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 6:38 PM Daniel Dekany <ddek...@apache.org> wrote:
> So far it seems that using a new package, like > freemarker.ext.jakarta.servlet and freemarker.ext.jakarta.jsp was the more > popular compromise. As far as that part of the source code can be generated > from the packages with similar names, I assume that we will give that > approach a try. This we do after the Gradle PR was merged (which looks very > close). Any comments? > > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 11:50 PM Daniel Dekany <ddek...@apache.org> wrote: > >> The package of Servlet related classes has changed because of Jakarta, >> which breaks our Servlet support (freemarker.ext.servlet), which is packged >> into freemarker.jar. >> >> We have to choose which end result we want (ignore the "how" for now) as >> the solution, from these two (as far as I can tell): >> >> 1. We can copy the `freemarker.ext.servlet` package into >> `freemarker.ext.jakartaservlet` (or such), and we will only have the normal >> artifact in Maven Central, which contains that, and also the older >> freemarker.ext.servlet. Explanation: As you probably know, 2.x has a single >> monolithic freemarker.jar artifact, which already contains support classes >> of various optional dependencies. We already support multiple incompatible >> Serlvet/JSP versions, and has separate version-specific classes for some. >> But, classes like freemarker.ext.servlet.FreemarkerServlet managed to stay >> common amongst Servlet API versions. For the Jakarta change not even that >> can remain common of course. >> >> 2. We can have an additional artifact variant (let's say via Maven >> classifier "jakarta"), that still uses the `freemarker.ext.servlet` >> package, but there that links to the Jakarta Servlet classes. This artifact >> will drop support for pre-Jakarta Servlet/JSP versions. >> >> Possibility 1 pro: We don't have to publish one more artifact. Also, then >> users don't have to fiddle with dependency management to choose the >> artifact with the "jakarta" classifier. >> >> Possibility 1 con: Any existing dependent Java code that used >> `freemarker.ext.servlet` so far, and wants to migrate to a Jakarta Servlet >> container, has to be modified to link to `freemarker.ext.jakartaservlet` >> instead. That sounds quite bad, however, the same dependent Java code >> likely has to be modified anyway, to link to Jakarta Servlet classes. >> Except, there are tools, like >> https://github.com/apache/tomcat-jakartaee-migration, that transforms >> jar-s to depend on Jakarta Servlet API, but same tools of course won't >> replace links to freemarker.ext.servlet with freemarker.ext.jakartaservlet, >> so some pain is expected. Also, `web.xml`-s that refer to >> `freemarker.ext.servlet.FreemarkerSerlvet` also have to be modified, if >> someone uses a Jakarta container. >> >> Opinions? >> >> Note 1: We had two attempts so far on this issue, but certainly the >> actual solution will be a 3rd one. Anyway, the "how" is now not the point >> now, but here they are: >> >> - https://github.com/apache/freemarker/pull/94 >> - https://github.com/apache/freemarker/pull/95 >> >> Note 2: At some later(!) point, maybe in a FreeMarker 2.4.0, we can get >> rid of non-Jakarta servlet support. At the same point, we will also get rid >> of the GAE/non-GAE variety. So we could end up with just a single variant >> of the freemarker 2.x artifact, over time. >> >
