Hi Markus, I’m working on including a fix. That’s why I don’t plan Karaf 4.2.9 at least during the week end (it gives time to address several issues including the "paste" one ;) ).
Regards JB > Le 19 mars 2020 à 07:15, Markus Rathgeb <maggu2...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Hi, > > thank you for your. > Is there any change to get the c'n'p error (caused by jline) fixed for > 4.2.9? > > Best regards, > Markus > > Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> schrieb am Do., 19. März 2020, > 06:36: > >> Hello >> >> I can say only about Karaf 4.3.0. I'm indeed working on Pax Web 8 (I'm >> finally at the stage where I can actually push some (almost) atomic >> changes. Initially it was just 100+ files changed at once). Current state >> can be checked in master-improvements branch >> <https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.web/commits/master-improvements>. >> >> I found just too many places in Pax Web 7 that were just too much against >> R6 specification and I needed ... more changes than I planned. Even if I've >> not reviewed yet pax-web-extender-war, I've rebuilt the foundation so >> seriously with both WAR and Whiteboard extenders in mind that it should be >> easier to progress now. >> >> The most important change in Pax Web 8 now is that there's clear >> distinction between "OSGi Context Model" and "Servlet Context Model". Here >> are some requirements that stem directly from specification and I've >> already implemented them: >> >> - "Servlet Context Model" is in 1:1 relation with actual servlet context >> (or single, unique "context path" like "/c1") >> - "OSGi Context Model" is in 1:1 relation with HttpContext (from Http >> Service spec) or ServletContextHelper (from Whiteboard Service spec). >> Such >> "OSGi context" "points to" single "Servlet Context" >> - *but* there may be many "OSGi Context Models" pointing to single >> "Servlet Context Model" >> - *also*, single Whiteboard-registered servlet may be associated with >> many "OSGi Context Models" >> >> The implications are sometimes amazing: >> >> - a servlet may be registered to many "OSGi Context Models", which point >> to different "Servlet Context Models" - this means servlet /s may be >> available under /c1/s and /c2/s >> - a servlet may be registered to many "OSGi Context Models", which point >> to *the same* "Servlet Context Models" - this means servlet /s may be >> available under /c/s but handleSecurity() is taken from "OSGi Context >> Model" with highest ranking - Pax Web 7 didn't do that at all >> - a filter may be mapped to /* and be associated with many "OSGi Context >> Models", but should be added to filter chain ONLY if the chain ends >> with a >> servlet associated with matching "OSGi Context Model" >> - a servlet associated wtih "OSGi Context Model" point to, say, /c1 >> "Servlet Context" is available at, say, /c1/s. But when service >> registration properties for the associated ServletContextHelper (1:1 >> with >> "OSGi Context Model") change, servlet has to "switch" from /c1/s to, >> say, >> /c2/s (or even /s when given "OSGi Context Model" starts being >> associated >> with the default "Servlet Context Model" >> >> So, you see (I hope) that Pax Web 8 is not going to be an easy release ;) >> But I really try hard now... >> >> regards >> Grzegorz Grzybek >> >> czw., 19 mar 2020 o 05:35 Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> >> napisał(a): >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> First of all, I’m sorry for the ones who are on Slack, I have some >>> connection issues since yesterday morning. It should be fixed by the end >> of >>> today max. >>> >>> Anyway, I would like to move forward about the releases. >>> >>> For this week, I would like to submit to vote: >>> >>> - Decanter 2.3.0: it’s a major (very major ;)) release bringing new >>> features (new alerting service with much better condition, time series, >>> Prometheus appender, new collectors, …), updates (Elasticsearch 7 >> support, >>> …) and fixes. I’m rebasing and polishing branches, I hope to submit >>> Decanter release to vote during the week end. >>> - Karaf 4.2.9, even if it doesn’t contain as much as 4.2.8, I would like >>> to submit this release to vote as it contains the fix about HTTPs access >> to >>> Maven Central. As for Decanter, I plan the start the vote during the week >>> end or early next week. >>> - Karaf 4.3.0. We released 4.3.0.RC1 some weeks ago. Unfortunately we >>> didn’t get lot of feedback. So, even if Pax Web is not fully ready for >> OSGi >>> R7 (thanks again to Greg for working hard on this), I propose to move >>> forward on 4.3.0 "as it is". Thoughts ? >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>
