Dear ee spec group. The servlet-api project is trying to come up with our project plan for our 5.0 and 5.1 releases. The 5.0 release will be our javax->jakarta rename release and the key question we h

Please be aware that this repository has been archived as this project is now part of the EE4J initiative. All activities are now happening in the corresponding Eclipse repository [https://github.com/

All, We are a bit concerned with providing reasonable support for annotation scanning in java 9 multi version jars. We are already seeing these jars in our java 8 deployments (from some logging framew

Hi, I've just discovered that the archives for this list (and the other Java EE lists) before it was migrated from java.net to a Google group may be found here: http://download.oracle.com/javaee-archi

Hello Volunteers, We are happy to report that we passed Final Approval Ballot with all yes votes, no abstains, and one non-vote. It has been an honor and a privilige to work with you all on t

Hello Volunteers, Due to one final TCK change and a small spec wording change we had to delay handing the FAB to JCP by one week. The revised schedule is: 2017-07-25 Hand FAB materials to JCP

Hello Experts, In Servlet 3.1, one can reference the ejb in web.xml. The intent of section 8.1 is to enumerate the annotations for which there is corresponding XML syntax. EJB and EJBS were mistake

Hello Experts, More refinement for the text from the TCK team. I suggest we add the following advisory text, which we agreed in one of the previous EG discussion, at the end of the description of thi

Hello Volunteers, Consider these methods in HttpServletMapping Spec> String getMatchValue() Return the portion of the URI path that Spec> caused this request to be matched or the empty String if

Hello Volunteers, Here is a schedule update: 2017-07-10 21 Day PFD End 2017-07-18 Hand FAB materials to JCP 2017-07-25 14 Day FAB Start 2017-08-07 14 Day FAB End 2017-08-10 GA Release To that e

Yes. Yes. Note that these changes are consistent with what was discussed on the EG and users list as the expected behaviour. +1. I know I missed your deadline but I hope this change is applied.

EB> I would very much like to stick with the existing resolution. That EB> said, yes, it is a draft. I need to see if we can make a change like EB> this without having to do another Proposed Final D

Hello Volunteers, Here is a heads up that we have handed the Proposed Final Draft of the spec to the JCP this week. The only difference between the Public Review and the Proposed Final Draft is the

Hello Experts, Our TCK developer discovered a corner case in the 73-MappingDiscovery spec and impl: what to do about the case of getNamedDispatcher()? I propose we do the same approach in this case

Is there any change of getting https://github.com/javaee/servlet-spec/issues/105 resolved for Servlet 4.0? Mark

Hi all, Following up on another detail as I work on Tomcat's implementation. My recollection is that if the application calls setTrailerFields() in a situation where it will not take effect (e.g. af

Let me summarize what we discuss in the previous emails. We agree on a) have the following API in HttpServletRequest: Map<String, String> getTrailerFields() b) there is no validation of trailer fiel

----- Thanks to those of you who joined groups.io servlet-spec. The stragglers are Bcc'd on this mail. If you are an EG member and have not yet joined groups.io servlet-spec, please do so now. Shin

I'm working through implementing the latest changes and, comparing my implementation to the API, I noticed that we are missing a method: HttpServletRequestWrapper public boolean isTrailerFieldsReady(

----- Thanks to those of you who joined groups.io servlet-spec. The stragglers are Bcc'd on this mail. If you are an EG member and have not yet joined groups.io servlet-spec, please do so now. Shin