https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62527
Remy Maucherat changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62527
--- Comment #5 from Mark Thomas ---
I've had another read of the relevant bits of the Java EE spec and I can't see
a clear reason for this limitation. There are some hints that suggest it is to
do with the scopes of the various defined namespac
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62527
--- Comment #4 from romain.manni-bucau ---
Yes, issue is really it breaks a lot of users (we already lived that years ago
and all apps needed to be reconfigured).
There is a flag for strict compliance in tomcat already so maybe this is a
behav
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62527
--- Comment #3 from Remy Maucherat ---
Well, ok, but there is existing use and I don't see a benefit of being strict
here (it's not like a URL or HTTP element where security issues can occur). So
the fix sounds more like a regression than an im
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62527
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #2 from Mark Tho
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62527
--- Comment #1 from Remy Maucherat ---
I think r1831256 should be partially reverted due to this existing use. I plan
to do it shortly unless there's a disagreement.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
--
