Hi, I'm not seeing how SLING-2670 changes the picture, it just makes accessing the suffix easier, but still the extension is appended to the existing resource, so it's still: http://host/bin/sample.ext/some/more/info and not http://host/bin/sample/some/more/info.ext
As this already works with servlets, I don't feel we should change this. The use case in SLING-2726 can easily be implemented with a very simple resource provider, the use case of SLING-2670 works with servlets. So unless we have a different use case, I think we should leave it as is. Regards Carsten 2013/2/19 Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com>: > Hi > > In SLING-2726 [1] it is requested that registered servlets are made > accessible as if they would have been registered with a prefix instead of an > fixed path. > > The reasoning for declining the request is that Sling addresses resources, > that servlets are not to be considered resources, that servlets are > rendering, and that everything not going through the repository does not > benefit from automatic access control. > > Looking at what we have: A servlet is addressable by its exact path or if the > servlet path is the prefix to the URL and that prefix path has an extension. > For example a Servlet registered at /bin/sample is accessible with both of > the following URLs: > > * http://host/bin/sample > * http://host/bin/sample.ext/some/more/info > > As part of another request (SLING-2670 [2]) we will be adding support to > access the request suffix as if it would address another resource to allow > for admin requests to servlets which handle secondary resources. > > In this context, allowing for servlet registrations to be prefixes instead of > fixed paths is nothing new. The only change is that the mandatory extension, > which makes the URL ugly (see second example above), is not required any > longer. > > Regards > Felix > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-2726 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-2670 -- Carsten Ziegeler cziege...@apache.org
