You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-dev@axis.apache.org by Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> on 2003/10/25 22:24:52 UTC
VOTE : Servlet 2.2 -> 2.3?
Is everyone cool with making the jump from Servlet 2.2 to 2.3? Putting the
<listener> configuration in the web.xml entails changing the DOCTYPE
declaration.... So I've got this finished and working in my sandbox, but
don't want to check it in until I've confirmed most of us think it's OK.
Considering it's been over 2 years since Servlet 2.3 came out, I think it's
reasonable to assume most people have it by now.... Doing this would also
let us use other listeners for lifecycle events.
I'll start with:
+1
--Glen
----- Original Message -----
From: <bu...@apache.org>
To: <ax...@ws.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 2:11 PM
Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 11815] - ServiceLifecycle.destroy() never called
when session is destroyed
> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
> RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
> <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11815>.
> ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
> INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11815
>
> ServiceLifecycle.destroy() never called when session is destroyed
>
> gdaniels@macromedia.com changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Severity|Normal |Major
> Priority|Other |High
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From gdaniels@macromedia.com 2003-10-25
18:11 -------
> OK, folks, let's get on this one. I kicked the priority and severity up.
> Here's the big question - do we still need to support servlet 2.2? If so,
the
> solution is tricky, and perhaps we start with Steve's code, if he still
has it
> around. If we can require 2.3, the solution is easy, and we just build
> HttpSessionListeners.
>
> For starters, I propose doing the HttpSessionListener solution and
checking it
> in, then we can go from there if we need to support 2.2.
>
>
RE: VOTE : Servlet 2.2 -> 2.3?
Posted by Rick Kellogg <rm...@comcast.net>.
+1 Here.
More info:
Orion 2.0.2 - Servlet 2.3
Tomcat 3.x - Servlet 2.2
Tomcat 4.x - Servlet 2.3
Tomcat 5.x - Servlet 2.4
Jetty 5.x - Servlet 2.4
Jetty 4.x - Servlet 2.3
Jetty 3.x - Servlet 2.2
Oracle 10g OC4J - Servlet 2.3
Borland Application Server 5.2 - Servlet 2.3
Can someone check on WebSphere on older platforms? That is the only
sticking point I can see.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Loughran [mailto:steve_l@iseran.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 9:36 PM
To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: Re: VOTE : Servlet 2.2 -> 2.3?
Glen Daniels wrote:
> Is everyone cool with making the jump from Servlet 2.2 to 2.3? Putting
the
> <listener> configuration in the web.xml entails changing the DOCTYPE
> declaration.... So I've got this finished and working in my sandbox, but
> don't want to check it in until I've confirmed most of us think it's OK.
> Considering it's been over 2 years since Servlet 2.3 came out, I think
it's
> reasonable to assume most people have it by now.... Doing this would also
> let us use other listeners for lifecycle events.
>
> I'll start with:
>
> +1
>
+1.
I am also partially in favour of using XDoclet to generate the web.xml;
all the markup to do that is already in the source. I say partially as
it adds time+ complexity to a build -my pref is autogen the web.xml when
needed, but check the file in so that most people dont need to do the step.
Re: VOTE : Servlet 2.2 -> 2.3?
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@iseran.com>.
Glen Daniels wrote:
> Is everyone cool with making the jump from Servlet 2.2 to 2.3? Putting the
> <listener> configuration in the web.xml entails changing the DOCTYPE
> declaration.... So I've got this finished and working in my sandbox, but
> don't want to check it in until I've confirmed most of us think it's OK.
> Considering it's been over 2 years since Servlet 2.3 came out, I think it's
> reasonable to assume most people have it by now.... Doing this would also
> let us use other listeners for lifecycle events.
>
> I'll start with:
>
> +1
>
+1.
I am also partially in favour of using XDoclet to generate the web.xml;
all the markup to do that is already in the source. I say partially as
it adds time+ complexity to a build -my pref is autogen the web.xml when
needed, but check the file in so that most people dont need to do the step.
Re: VOTE : Servlet 2.2 -> 2.3?
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <di...@yahoo.com>.
+1
--- Glen Daniels <gl...@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
>
> Is everyone cool with making the jump from Servlet 2.2 to 2.3? Putting the
> <listener> configuration in the web.xml entails changing the DOCTYPE
> declaration.... So I've got this finished and working in my sandbox, but
> don't want to check it in until I've confirmed most of us think it's OK.
> Considering it's been over 2 years since Servlet 2.3 came out, I think it's
> reasonable to assume most people have it by now.... Doing this would also
> let us use other listeners for lifecycle events.
>
> I'll start with:
>
> +1
>
> --Glen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <bu...@apache.org>
> To: <ax...@ws.apache.org>
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 2:11 PM
> Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 11815] - ServiceLifecycle.destroy() never called
> when session is destroyed
>
>
> > DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
> > RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
> > <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11815>.
> > ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
> > INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
> >
> > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11815
> >
> > ServiceLifecycle.destroy() never called when session is destroyed
> >
> > gdaniels@macromedia.com changed:
> >
> > What |Removed |Added
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > Severity|Normal |Major
> > Priority|Other |High
> >
> >
> >
> > ------- Additional Comments From gdaniels@macromedia.com 2003-10-25
> 18:11 -------
> > OK, folks, let's get on this one. I kicked the priority and severity up.
> > Here's the big question - do we still need to support servlet 2.2? If so,
> the
> > solution is tricky, and perhaps we start with Steve's code, if he still
> has it
> > around. If we can require 2.3, the solution is easy, and we just build
> > HttpSessionListeners.
> >
> > For starters, I propose doing the HttpSessionListener solution and
> checking it
> > in, then we can go from there if we need to support 2.2.
> >
> >
=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/