Hey all,

Sorry for the bump, there is also a second issue that I would like to ask 
concerning the migration from JSP to HTL. We have versioned resource types in 
folders concerning the release date. For example 
/apps/myapp/1702/components/mycomponent

Now when switching to sightly, we get following exception:

org.apache.sling.scripting.sightly.impl.compiler.CompilerException: 
org.apache.sling.scripting.sightly.impl.compiler.CompilerException: 
org.apache.sling.scripting.sightly.impl.compiler.CompilerException: Compilation 
errors in apps/myapp/1702/components/mycomponent/SightlyJava_main.java:
Line 19, column 971 : The declared package "apps.myapp" does not match the 
expected package "apps.myapp.1702.components.mycomponent"
Line 19, column 981 : Syntax error on token ".1702", delete this token
    at 
org.apache.sling.scripting.sightly.impl.compiler.SightlyJavaCompilerService.compileSource(SightlyJavaCompilerService.java:143)

I guess this is because it translates the folders to package names, and 1702 is 
not a valid package identifier, but why isn’t it throwing this exception then 
in all your already existing jsp components? And is there a workaround for this 
or should I register a bug.

Greetings,
Roy
> On 12 Oct 2016, at 18:11, Roy Teeuwen <r...@teeuwen.be> wrote:
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> For one of our current projects, we are in the process of making all the new 
> components/templates in HTL instead of JSP. One of the things we did notice 
> though is that when we use a component as resourceSuperType that still uses 
> jsp, that in those jsp files we use the following as stated on how to use it 
> in the docs[1]:
> 
> <sling:call script=“myscript.jsp”/>
> 
> This makes it that we can’t overwrite the myscript.jsp file by a 
> myscript.html file because the script call specifically states myscript.jsp. 
> Now I tried it out by removing the .jsp extension from the script attribute, 
> and this seems to work! 
> So my question now is, is there a reason not to do it this way? Why is it 
> stated in the docs that you should say myscript.jsp instead of just myscript, 
> seeing as myscript alone already works too and would have made it possible to 
> overwrite the specific scripts by other template engines.
> 
> Greetings,
> Roy
> 
> [1] 
> https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/scripting/scripting-jsp.html#call
>  
> <https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/scripting/scripting-jsp.html#call>

Reply via email to