On 08/12/2014 23:02, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > 2014-12-08 21:56 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>: > >> The more I think about this, the more I think it made no sense to >> include extensions on the server side without an API to add extension >> implementations. But that boat has sailed. >> > > Ok, but these APIs are there for the time being, as I said these folks just > wish to test them. > >> >> I appreciate that these options are necessary in order to pass the TCK >> and I don't want to get in the way of that. How about the following: >> >> - keep the two options as above >> - mark them as deprecated with some text to the effect that they are >> only present to enable the TCK to pass for the WebSocket 1.1 API and >> they are expected to be removed once the WebSocket API includes a >> mechanism for adding custom extension implementations. >> > Unless the EG works on this item, this seems an established behavior > rather than some deprecated thing. I'll be very happy to remove them when > things change.
I have been assuming that the EG (when it starts) is going to look at a standard API for extensions since it is - in my view - the biggest, most obvious gap in the specification. I'll add some comments but not the deprecation markers for now. They may get added later if the WebSocket EG does do something in this area. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
