2018-05-16 16:47 GMT+03:00 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>: > On 16/05/18 14:31, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >> 2018-05-16 13:03 GMT+03:00 <ma...@apache.org>:
>>> @@ -205,6 +206,22 @@ Automatically created by Apache Tomcat J >>> jspc.webxml.footer=\n\ >>> </web-app>\n\ >>> \n >>> +jspc.webfrg.header=<?xml version="1.0" encoding="{0}"?>\n\ >>> +<web-fragment xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee"\n\ >>> +\ xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"\n\ >>> +\ xsi:schemaLocation="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee\n\ >>> +\ >>> http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/javaee/web-fragment_3_0.xsd"\n\ >>> +\ version="3.0"\n\ >> >> 4) Update version, namespace, schema to 3.1 for Tomcat 8.0, 8.5, 4.0 >> for Tomcat 9 ? > > The web.xml generation sticks to Servlet 2.5. I decided to stick to the > lowest useable version number for the fragment as well since I could not > see any benefit in generating a file with later version number. > As precompilation targets a specific release of Tomcat, and is not guaranteed to be compatible with a different build release, I see no benefit in trying to be compatible. Regarding "Servlet 2.5" (or 2.3 actually) comment 4 (April 2014) in this bug 50234 has a complaint about it: [quote] At the moment (Tomcat 7), a dummy web.xml has to be defined in order to define the version (i.e. for expresions within the JSPs). [/quote] https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50234 Sticking to 2.3 is OK when inserting a fragment into existing web.xml. When generating a new web.xml, one ends up with a web application that uses a different version of spec as opposed to a web app without a web.xml file. Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org