Hi, >>It's fragile design >What do you mean?
It's fragile because it's not portable. Other containers of the present and future won't support this feature because it's not in the Spec. The Spec won't have this feature because it encourages coupling of web applications, which are supposed to be independent of each other. So even if you do a solution for Tomcat it won't be portable now or in the future, meaning it's a waste of time. >I could, but this is so ugly. And the patch is version-dependent. Any patch would be container-specific, which is even worse than version-dependent. >(I've posted another email re: that, anyway) I (and I'm sure others) have noticed your other message. It's a similar story, although more interesting, and not as bad as apps relying on one another. For resources to rely on one another there has to be a loading order to them. Again, not mandated by the Spec, and therefore not portable even if we did do it in Tomcat. For situations like that, you can use a framework like Tapestry or any other that resolves these dependencies for you. >Thank you for your answer, Yoav. BTW, I'm impressed by the number of posts >you answer to... Bravo! :) Thank you ;) I try to help... Yoav Shapira http://www.yoavshapira.com This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged. This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else. If you are not the(an) intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system and notify the sender. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
