Mark, On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 10:24 AM Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 19/11/2025 23:28, Christopher Schultz wrote: > > On 11/19/25 2:18 PM, Coty Sutherland wrote: > > <snip/> > > >> After writing all of that out, maybe this should be a separate tool > >> instead > >> of enhancements to configtest or we should incorporate some of the > checks > >> into a pre-startup step in the boot process? Thoughts? > > > > A separate tool does make sense to me if you already plan on the large > > feature set shown above. I can only guess it will continue to > metastasize. > > While the size of the feature set does suggest a separate tool would be > better, that makes me think of the (very) old admin app where we had a > real problem keeping it in sync with changes to the components it was > meant to administer. That makes me think integration into the core > Tomcat code might be better. > Thanks for the tip. > > That in turn got me thinking about how strict we want these checks to > be. We probably want three options: ignore, warn, refuse to start. And > probably want to set those per category - for some value of category. > Yes, I was thinking exactly that. > > Implementation-wise, something built on LifecycleListener? > Maybe; I hadn't considered a listener. I was thinking of a custom validator architecture that uses SPI to register custom validators which would allow users to put their own validators in jars within lib/...but that might be overengineering this particular set of features unless it gets put into a separate tool/library. I don't want to add anything that's very complicated to maintain, but I think that these changes do have value for users. > > Sorry I don't have concrete proposals and I'm unlikely to have much time > to help but in general I am in favour. > No problem, thanks for the feedback. > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
