| Summary: | Explore moving to release train Jetty | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | John Arthorne <john.arthorne> |
| Component: | User Assistance | Assignee: | platform-ua-inbox <platform-ua-inbox> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | akurtakov, cgold, ChrisAustin, david_williams, gunnar, rsternberg, ruediger.herrmann, sja.eclipse, tjwatson |
| Version: | 3.7 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows 7 | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | 309529, 341643 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
John Arthorne
I think that it is a good idea to move to newer versions of Jetty as they are available. See Bug 306920 for an example of a bug that has been fixed in Jetty but is still in Eclipse because we are using an older version of Jetty. I can't think of why we would not want to do this. Chris, we have started discussing moving to Jetty 8 in Eclipse PMC calls. We didn't have a good feel for the impact on UA for this move. Can do you some initial investigation and give us an idea on much work is involved here? There are impacts on several teams so we'll need to move early in Juno if we are going to do it. (In reply to comment #3) The only area of impact is that Jetty 8 uses Servlet 3.0. There is one specific impact on the UA tests - compilation errors in org.eclipse.ua.tests.help.webapp.MockServletRequest which implements HttpServletRequest and is used to test the reading and writing of cookies. Other than that there is nothing about UA or the UA extension points which will present any issues that could not be encountered by any client of the Equinox server. Clients that write their own servlets need to make sure that their version dependencies on javax.servlet and javax.servlet.http are not overly restrictive. I don't see any good alternative to moving forward to using Jetty 8. Thanks Chris! By chance, I happened across this old bug. Since Jetty is not part of "release train", per se (any longer) I think fair to close as "won't fix" ... though, the intent is pretty much covered in bug 453910 -- for Mars, at least. |