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
