On 23 Sep 2009, at 09:49, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Ok, it seems that this issue is rather a controversial one.
The question remains if we should apply it or not. As far as I could
follow the discussion, Felix and Ian are not happy with the patch
while
Alex claims that it doesn't do any harm.
So I think, if you two, Felix and Ian, could shortly state what your
current feelings are about this issue we can proceed. Either we can
apply it then or I'll close it.
IMHO this comes down to if you believe that the resolution of the
resource should be based on parsing the URI path alone, or should be
informed by the existence of a real resource in the content system.
At the moment most resources in Sling derive the fields of the
Resource object from the real resources, NonExistentResource is one of
the exceptions since it has no resource to inform it.
Applying the patch resolved the inconsistency but generates a deeper
and more fundamental inconsistency that if also resolved would not
allow resources to have extensions in the content system (ie /content/
readme.doc would not be a valid resource name since parsing by path
alone would make the resource /content/readme )
On that basis I am of the opinion that the current behavior is
consistent with Resource resolution being based on real resources and
so the patch should not be applied.
You will notice I haven't "voted", as I am prepared to be persuaded
that my assumptions and conclusions are incorrect.
Ian
Thanks
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler
[email protected]
