Le 26 avr. 2015 08:24, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > Break container usage > > As per the servlet spec only web-fragment.xml in jars of WEB-INF/lib must get picked up automatically. >
5 first words are the issue. > See servlet spec 8.2.1 „Modularity of web.xml“: > > „If a framework wants its META-INF/web-fragment.xml honored in such a way that it augments a web application’s web.xml, the framework must be bundled within the web application's WEB-INF/lib directory. > … > In other words, only JAR files bundled in a web application’s WEB-INF/lib directory, but not those higher up in the class loading delegation chain, need to be scanned for web-fragment.xml" > > So that one should not be a blocker. > > > I guess the only loss is some amount of > > ordering control you might have had if you > > included it in the parent web.xml directly. > We can force it "before" which should almost be enough. > I had the exact other problem which brought me to this ;) > In my lightweightee example I use deltaspike-jsf which has a web-fragment for the window handler, ViewConfigPathValidator, etc. > It has > <ordering> > <after> > <others/> > </after> > </ordering> > but _still_ gets executed before the WebBeansConfigurationListener of our own local web.xml > So I hoped that switching to web-fragment.xml for owb as well (with before-others) should fix that. Still need to test. > Need to check what’s going on. Or if this is a bug in the pretty old tomcat7 I use… > Side note: if done - no issue in tomee btw - should be a 1.6 and not 1.5.1 IMO > LieGrue, > strub > > > > Am 26.04.2015 um 01:12 schrieb Joseph Bergmark <[email protected]>: > > > > It should be well supported on any servlet 3.0 compliant container as its > > part of the specification. I suppose it could be inconvenient for > > application servers that already have OWB integration, but in that case I > > wouldn't expect the user to be including OWB in their application at all. > > > > As long as we document that including the openwebbeans-web module into your > > application will cause a ServletContainerInitializer to automatically be > > added, I don't see any harm in it. I guess the only loss is some amount of > > ordering control you might have had if you included it in the parent > > web.xml directly. > > > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau < [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Le 25 avr. 2015 21:58, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> a écrit : > >>> > >>> Hi! > >>> > >>> Should we add the WebBeansConfigurationListener (or later the two split > >> ones, see OWB-1055) into a web-fragment.xml inside our openwebbeasns-web > >> module? > >>> > >>> Pro: no need to add any listener manually + we should be neatly able to > >> define the default priorities (outermost listener). > >>> Con: not sure yet, that’s what I’m curious about :) Any input? > >>> > >> > >> Break container usage, not always well supported? > >> > >> That said could be done in another module. Would split lib and app > >> artifacts which is good. > >> > >> Also the conversation filter needs to be handled prog so > >> ServletContextInitializer sounds better. > >> > >>> > >>> LieGrue, > >>> strub > >> >
