On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 8:43 AM Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 2:38 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > All, > > > > Since the introduction of multi-part upload support in Servlet 3 (Tomcat > > 7), Tomcat has used a package renamed fork of Commons FileUpload to > > provide that support. > > > > Recently, FileUpload has undergone some major refactoring for 2.x to > > modularise it to support different versions of the Servlet > > specification, primarily Java EE vs Jakarta EE. As part of that, the > > minimum Java version for 2.x is Java 11. > > > > The code Tomcat is currently based on is now the essentially 1.x branch. > > This was created from the 1.4 release so Tomcat currently has a few > > changes that were not applied to that branch. The minimum Java version > > for this branch is Java 6. > > > > I have spent the last couple of hours looking at updating Tomcat 11.0.x > > to the 2.x FileUpload code. It is doable, but we'll need to bring in > > most of Commons IO as well which is about another 500k. > > > > Given the minimum Java version requirements, Tomcat 8.5.x and 9.0.x will > > need to remain based on FileUpload 1.x. > > > > Tomcat 10.1.x and Tomcat 11.0.x could opt to remain based on FileUpload > > 1.x or switch to 2.x. > > > > We need to decide what to do. > > > > Since we have little choice for Tomcat 8.5.x and 9.0.x, I will be > > aligning these branches with FileUpload 1.x first. > > > > I'm not a huge fan of pulling a large chunk of Commons IO or on making > > sufficient changes to our fork so we don't have to. I am therefore > > currently planning on aligning 10.1.x and 11.0.x with FileUpload 1.x as > > well. > > > > I do intend to see if there are changes from FileUpload 2.x that are > > worth cherry-picking into Tomcat (and FileUpload 1.x) if minimum Java > > versions permit. > > > > All that said, the Jakarta EE Migration tool already includes a package > > renamed copy of Commons IO (as well as Lang and Compress) so there might > > be something we co do there - maybe a new Commons forks JAR? > > > > Thoughts? > > +1 on staying with fileupload 1.x for all branches then, for the time > being. 11 could move to 2.x eventually it seems. > +1
