On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Geoff Soutter wrote:
> Milt,
>
> I didn't mean to turn this into a flame war. I think the Servlet API
No intention to flame. I just felt your comments deserved a response.
> is great. That doesn't mean it's perfect though. This is a case
> where it could have been done better, and it could still be
> improved.
Sure, there's always room for improvement, and not every change will
be without problems. But from what I have seen, the changes from 2.0
to 2.1 were not as bad as you make them out to be. I'm not claiming
to be an expert on how the removed functionality could've been used,
but at least from what I've seen posted to these lists, AFAIR, I don't
think there was anything that couldn't have been done with the new
API. Also, just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you
*should* do it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milt Epstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Saturday, 17 July 1999 2:15
>
> >On Fri, 16 Jul 1999, Geoff Soutter wrote:
> >
> >> Hi there Craig,
> >>
> >> I've been trying to do a similar kind of thing. Unfortunately the
> >> APIs were deprecated AND DISABLED without warning when they went
> >> from Servlet API 2.0 to 2.1. Which is pretty awful for anyone using
> >> those API's. Apparently they were a security risk, but they have
> >> legitimate uses as well which the Servlet API team decided to
> >> ignore. :-(
> >[ ... ]
> >
> >Servlets and the JSDK are a relatively young technology (despite how
> >fast things move these days :-). They're trying to improve things, by
> >making them cleaner and more secure, better organized, and with more
> >functionality. I think they are doing a pretty good job of this,
> >especially considering some of the latest talk of where things are
> >heading, and comparing it to where things were back with JSDK 1.0 and
> >2.0. Yes, it's a shame some functionality was removed, making things
> >backwards-incompatible, but that is the price you have to pay
> >sometimes. Justifying something that is a security risk as having
> >"legitimate uses as well" is not very compelling, especially when
> >there are alternate ways to do most/all you could've done with the
> >functionality that was dropped (which is the case, as far as I can
> >tell).
> >
>
Milt Epstein
Research Programmer
Software/Systems Development Group
Computing and Communications Services Office (CCSO)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff SERVLET-INTEREST".
Archives: http://archives.java.sun.com/archives/servlet-interest.html
Resources: http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/external-resources.html
LISTSERV Help: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/user/user.html
