Bram, The HttpContext can load resources from wherever it likes, based on whatever rules it chooses.
The implementations in Felix etc that you have found are just that: implementations. They do not imply any constraint on other potential implementations. Regards, Neil On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Bram de Kruijff <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello list, > > my question is whether it is valid to have a HttpContext that itself > is backed by multiple bundles that is uses to load whatever resources > based on its own implementation. The simple straightforward answer, I > thought, is yes. HttpContext is an interface so it can be anything as > long as it holds its end of the deal, right? > > The reason for asking is that I ran into several implementations > (Felix Whiteboard / PAX Web) that seem to binding the HttpContext > instance registration to the Bundle (id) that is registering it > preventing reuse over multiple bundles (unless you know the other > bundle's id or some other dirty trick based on impl knowledge). > > The spec (R42) as far as I see does not say anything that prevents me > from taking this approach. However, besides my HttpContext is an > interface assumption, it also does not explicitly state that it must > be allowed. So, is it allowed and/or are there pressing reasons why > this could be considered bad practice that would motivated binding to > one bundle? > > Thanks so much, > Bram > _______________________________________________ > OSGi Developer Mail List > [email protected] > https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev > _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List [email protected] https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
