Hi,
> However, certain servers support it and we are making sure that this issue
> is worked out in the JSP/Servlet specification expert group in which we
> participate. What the specification currently says about resources is this
> (section 4.4):
Didn't read this section..I was quoting what Craig had passed on to me.
<snip>
You make a very valid and excellent point. The key to getting Struts working
is to simply move the action.xml into the root hierarchy and set that in the
web.xml init parameter of the struts ActionServlet. Thats it..its done. So
until it is absolutely clear that the functionality Orion has is or is not
correct, I wouldn't change it either. I do very much agree with the way
Orion works. I think the WEB-INF should be part of the server/application
specific files, and not accessible via the servlet context. However, I have
noted that every other servlet engine I have worked with does allow this
access. I don't want to sound bad, but if they are all doing it, its
possible the Orion team misunderstood the docs..ofcourse the flip is true
too..its possible every other vendor (that I have used) misunderstood it.
Like I said..I like the Orion implementation, but if WAR files start popping
up as plugins to app servers and they all support it, Orion could have
problems working with them.
> If the expert group decides that the behaviour is going to be like Tomcat
> does it, we will turn it on in a second.
Did you talk to Danny Coward directly? Craig said you should talk to him as
he oversees the 2.2 spec, so he would have the final answer.
> Perhaps we'll even allow it just for Struts since people are bound to have
> problems with it otherwise, but I hope you see our point too.
I am surprised but alot of the Struts users are using Orion! Apparently you
have more word out than you might know. :) Or maybe you did know? I have
been spreading the word like wild fire on the other mailing lists. Even
Craig really likes Orion! ;)
> We do want to follow the specification by the word. It's our only
> guarantee
> of real portability. If we start adopting our product to other products
> instead of to the specification we're on very thin ice, and if the product
> we're adopting to is adopting itself to the specification later, we're
> lost.
Couldn't agree more.
Thank you.
