Hi Grzegorz Thanks for all the details.
And don’t get me wrong: I don’t blame anyone and there’s no worry at all ! The purpose is just to move forward on 4.3.0. So, after a long thinking, Karaf 4.3.0 with Pax Web 7.3.x is the smarter and reliable move IMHO. We will update to Pax Web 8 when ready. Thanks again for all your effort in Pax Web 8 and your great work. I also take part of the blame to not have helped you more (it’s gonna change, promise). Regards JB > Le 4 sept. 2020 à 18:51, Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Hello > > I'm the one responsible for the delay of Pax Web 8, but also (to > counterweight the blame), I'm the one who picked up the master branch and > tried to refactor it the way I did with Pax Logging ;) > > As we know, felix-http is a great OSGi CMPN R7 Whiteboard (and Http > Service) implementation where everything is implemented in a single > "dispatcher servlet" added to single Jetty's ServletContextHandler. > On the other hand, Pax Web is waaaaaaay more (WARs, JSPs, "mapping" > whiteboard, welcome files, etc.). > > My initial goal about "refactor Pax Web" was actually > https://ops4j1.jira.com/browse/PAXWEB-1123 ("HTTP Whiteboard and selection > of the ServletContextHelper") - what could possibly go wrong? :) When I > checked how Pax Web 7.x (and current master branch) handles "contexts", > after a few months of looking/reading at the code (started April 2019!) I > decided to refactor the core model of Pax Web, where each web "element" may > be associated with one or MORE "osgi contexts" which in turn point to a > single "servlet context" (in N:1) relation. > > I described the design in > http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Fwd-PAX-WEB-State-of-Pax-Web-8-td4058782.html > > So, the actual Whiteboard spec compliance is almost done and it was very > deep refactoring indeed (I tried to preserve the great work of others) and > these standard bits are missing: > - tests for preprocessors (because the machinery is already there) > - tests for changing registration properties of ServletContextHelper OSGi > service > - per ServletContextHelper session handling > > So we're very close to felix-http. > > The problem is that because I refactored the "core" of Pax Web so deeply, I > still didn't touch pax-web-extender-war (though I had this component in > mind in every step of the refactoring) - I don't expect BIG problems > "enabling" this in Pax Web 8. > > I wrote about ServletContainerInitializers here: > http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/HEADS-UP-Releases-schedule-4-2-10-4-3-0-RC2-Winegrower-1-0-tp4058780p4058834.html > but today I made good progress with dynamic registration of > servlets/filters/listeners from within SCIs (a must-have for JSPs and JSFs). > > So we can soon release Pax Web 8 with MUCH better R6/R7 compliance but with > missing old, commonly used Pax Web stuff (WARs...) > > Mind that as JBO said - there are no big differences between Whiteboard R6 > and R7 (and the annotations he's mentioned are actually not preserved at > runtime! These are to be processed by APT...). The point is that Pax Web 7 > had a major problem in handling this N:1 mapping between > ServletContextHelper and ServletContext and it required a total rewrite of > the model... > > We can have Karaf 4.3.0 with Pax Web 7.3.x which differs from 7.2.x in two > aspects: > - Undertow 1.x → 2.0.x (Servlet API 3 → 4) > - Tomcat 8 → 9 (Servlet API 3 → 4) > - Jetty is not changed because the only Jetty that supports Servlet API 4 > is ... Jetty 10 which at the same time requires JDK 11. > > I wrote about Pax Web 7.3.x as being a "technical preview" here: > https://groups.google.com/g/ops4j/c/6nF78NKs2qA/m/oRUxNtSyAQAJ > > I hope this clears the confusion and decreases my guilt ;) > > kind regards > Grzegorz Grzybek > > pt., 4 wrz 2020 o 18:19 Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> napisał(a): > >> Hi Serge, >> >> In the R7, it’s mostly the new features on the Http Whiteboard spec: >> >> - the new whiteboard annotations (@HttpWhiteboardServletPattern, >> @HttpWhiteboardContextSelect, @HttpWhiteboardServletMultipart) >> - the pre-filtering preprocessor >> >> All the rest is exactly the same. >> >> So, no change in the existing, just new convenient preprocessor and >> annotation. >> >> As Pax Web already provides alternative to this, it’s not a big deal. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >>> Le 4 sept. 2020 à 17:55, Serge Huber <shu...@jahia.com> a écrit : >>> >>> Hi JB, >>> >>> Yeah I know the feeling of not liking to wait for releases :) >>> >>> Could you give an example of the missing 10%? >>> >>> Anyway I think it makes sense and anyway maybe we should start working on >>> R8 & Karaf 5 ? :) >>> >>> So here's a non-binding +1. >>> >>> cheers, >>> Serge... >>> >>> Serge Huber >>> CTO & Co-Founder >>> T +41 22 361 3424 >>> 9 route des Jeunes | 1227 Acacias | Switzerland >>> jahia.com <http://www.jahia.com/> >>> SKYPE | LINKEDIN <https://www.linkedin.com/in/sergehuber> | TWITTER >>> <https://twitter.com/sergehuber> | VCARD >>> <http://www.jahia.com/vcard/HuberSerge.vcf> >>> >>> >>>> JOIN OUR COMMUNITY <http://www.jahia.com/> to evaluate, get trained and >>> to discover why Jahia is a leading User Experience Platform (UXP) for >>> Digital Transformation. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 5:46 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi guys, >>>> >>>> I have to take my duty as Karaf PMC ;) >>>> >>>> Clearly Karaf 4.3.0 is waiting for way too long: 4.3.0-SNAPSHOT started >> on >>>> Feb 11, 2019 ! >>>> >>>> I discussed with Greg earlier today, and we still have work to do for >> Pax >>>> Web 8.0. >>>> >>>> As I don’t want to hold Karaf 4.3.0 any longer, I took the decision to >>>> move forward and upgrade Karaf 4.3.0 to Pax Web 7.3.x. >>>> If Pax Web 7.3.x doesn’t fully cover R7, it covers 90% of the spec, and >>>> I’m pretty sure most of the users don’t use the pending 10%. >>>> >>>> So, here’s my proposal: >>>> - I’m working on Pax Web 7.3.9 preparation during the week end (updating >>>> container, etc) >>>> - In the meantime, I’m preparing Karaf 4.3.0 with a cleanup of the >>>> features and easy choice between Pax Web and Felix HTTP for the HTTP >> service >>>> - In also reviewing the Jira to include the maximum I can in 4.3.0. >>>> >>>> Reasonably, I think I will submit Karaf runtime 4.3.0 to vote next week >>>> (strong commitment). >>>> >>>> If you have any concern or comment about this plan, please let me know. >>>> >>>> Thanks ! >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> JB >> >>
