Hi Niclas,

thanks for responding, at least one does :)
If I don't get any feedback on this until beginning of March, I'll just do
a won't fix for these Issues, since I wouldn't know where to
dig into this, and right now I'm still hunting some
Bugs for the web/wab part of pax-web.


> It looks like Sten Roger Sandvik is still a subscriber... whether he
> is listening is a different story.
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Achim Nierbeck <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> right now there is an issue open http://issues.ops4j.org/browse/PAXWEB-162
>>
>>
>> According to the issue the code was supposed to be merged into the sources.
>>
>> <quote>
>>
>> Port my existing bridged HttpService implementation to Pax Web. This
>> involves creating three modules: pax-web-bridge-proxy,
>> pax-web-bridge-service and pax-web-bridge-bundle.
>> The proxy is used in the WAR file and is not a traditional bundle. A
>> BridgeFilter is registered in the existing web application. This
>> bridge filter checks for a "filter-delegate" in ServletContext. If it
>> exists, then redirects call to this filter. The framework starter must
>> also expose ServletContext as a service.
>>
>> Service implementation is a ordinary OSGi bundle with an Activator.
>> This activator looks up ServletContext as a service and sets a
>> filter-delegate as SessionContext attribute for the proxy to relate
>> to. It also exposes a ServerControllerFactory for pax-web-runtime to
>> get hold of.
>>
>> Bundle module is the composite bundle of pax-web-api, pax-web-runtime,
>> pax-web-spi, pax-web-bridge-service and related classes. This module
>> is the one to deploy inside a OSGi environment.
>>
>> </quote>
>>
>> Reading through the sources I don't see any of this committed.
>> Does anybody know what the status of this is?
>>
>> According to the issue a Sten Roger Sandvik did work on this and
>> somehow got some sources for it.
>> I don't know if Sten is still watching the mailinglist or is known to
>> somebody who reads this.
>> I would love to integrate this into pax-web since there are quite some
>> issues open to this.
>>
>> http://issues.ops4j.org/browse/PAXWEB-202
>> http://issues.ops4j.org/browse/PAXWEB-162
>> http://issues.ops4j.org/browse/PAXWEB-137
>>
>> Thanks, Achim
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> general mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>
>


_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to