[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6476?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Bart Wulteputte updated SLING-6476:
-----------------------------------
    Description: 
There seems to be a difference between the includes done by HTL and by JSP when 
it comes to valid resources which contain more than 2 dots in their name. This 
didn't used to be the case in older versions of HTL. JSP and HTL used to be 
interchangeable, but that's no longer the case for these kinds of resource 
paths.

I'm coming from an AEM background where the issue appeared post upgrade from 
6.0 (SP2) to 6.2. So I'm not sure where exactly this puts the issue in terms of 
sightly versions (since this is in the transference period of sightly being 
donated to apache, and being renamed, rebranded and reversioned)

I've prepared a package which illustrates the issue on the latest sling build 
of the trunk. The difference can be viewed by installing the attached package 
on a sling and looking at /content/jspPage.html vs /content/htlPage.html. Both 
pages include the same set of resource paths which are expected to yield the 
same results, but they don't.

There you will see that resource paths containing more than 1 dot are 
interpreted by sightly and resolve to a synthetic resource rather than the 
actual existing resource.

  was:
There seems to be a difference between the includes done by HTL and by sling 
when it comes to valid resources which contain more than 2 dots in their name. 
This didn't used to be the case in older versions of HTL. JSP and HTL used to 
be interchangeable, but that's no longer the case for these kinds of resource 
paths.

I'm coming from an AEM background where the issue appeared post upgrade from 
6.0 (SP2) to 6.2. So I'm not sure where exactly this puts the issue in terms of 
sightly versions (since this is in the transference period of sightly being 
donated to apache, and being renamed, rebranded and reversioned)

I've prepared a package which illustrates the issue on the latest sling build 
of the trunk. The difference can be viewed by installing the attached package 
on a sling and looking at /content/jspPage.html vs /content/htlPage.html. Both 
pages include the same set of resource paths which are expected to yield the 
same results, but they don't.

There you will see that resource paths containing more than 1 dot are 
interpreted by sightly and resolve to a synthetic resource rather than the 
actual existing resource.


> Sightly and sling resource include differ for resource paths with multiple 
> dots
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SLING-6476
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6476
>             Project: Sling
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Bart Wulteputte
>         Attachments: htl-vs-sling-1.0.zip
>
>
> There seems to be a difference between the includes done by HTL and by JSP 
> when it comes to valid resources which contain more than 2 dots in their 
> name. This didn't used to be the case in older versions of HTL. JSP and HTL 
> used to be interchangeable, but that's no longer the case for these kinds of 
> resource paths.
> I'm coming from an AEM background where the issue appeared post upgrade from 
> 6.0 (SP2) to 6.2. So I'm not sure where exactly this puts the issue in terms 
> of sightly versions (since this is in the transference period of sightly 
> being donated to apache, and being renamed, rebranded and reversioned)
> I've prepared a package which illustrates the issue on the latest sling build 
> of the trunk. The difference can be viewed by installing the attached package 
> on a sling and looking at /content/jspPage.html vs /content/htlPage.html. 
> Both pages include the same set of resource paths which are expected to yield 
> the same results, but they don't.
> There you will see that resource paths containing more than 1 dot are 
> interpreted by sightly and resolve to a synthetic resource rather than the 
> actual existing resource.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to