Hi Yes, I am basically in that camp, too, but ...
In our commercial product (Adobe Experience Manager aka CQ5) I realized that of the twenty-some filters only four require treatment and that all four can be "fixed" in a deployed instance by OSGi configuration setting the service.ranking property to the appropriate value. Two of these are actually Sling's I18NFilter and RewriteFilter. So, I tend to switch over to the fix-the-implementation-camp. Regards Felix Am 18.06.2013 um 14:20 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> wrote: >> ...We basically have two options: >> >> (1) Keep the implementation and fix the documentation. This would allow us >> to keep >> the implementation and maintain backwards compatibility at the expense of >> not following the OSGi spec >> with respect to the service.ranking property... > > I'm in favor of this option, including writing integration tests that > demonstrate it (yes I volunteer ;-) > > I don't think the OSGi spec is a problem, we are ordering the services > based on that, but then you could argue that filter 1 should be called > first because it's 1, or that filter 123456789 should be called first > because it has a higher ranking. > > Let's not break backwards compatibility based on this arbitrary choice > of ordering. > > -Bertrand
