I'm not opposed to this at all. I'm just going to look if there is a generic way we could do this so that other embedded servers can also use an API like this.

Well, my gut says that going general would either go against strongly typed, or against KISS… On the one hand, if you made an interface that took an Object, you'd have to cast it to see what it was, and on the other, you'd have an interface with each possible type.

Of course, there may be there's a technique I can't think of but I'm leaning towards each of the servers having their own, strongly typed, interfaces - any libraries that wanted to extend several could just have ServiceLoader entries for each as separate libs, or all in one at their discretion. I like the each as separate libs in the spirit of composition and because it would also keep extraneous dependencies to a minimum.

Yeah. I was looking for a way to make it part of the API, but there's not really a way to do that without breaking changes and it's not worth it.

We require all contributions to be made under the terms of the ASL 2.0 License: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Do you agree to these terms?

Yeah. I was looking for a way to make it part of the API, but there's not really a way to do that without breaking changes and it's not worth it.

We require all contributions to be made under the terms of the ASL 2.0 License: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Do you agree to these terms?

Yes, I agree

Looks great @scr-oath, thank you! Could you squash this down to a single commit? Sorry, I completely forgot to say something in the initial review.

Sure, I can do that, but I'm curious before I do - is it not possible to choose Squash Merge? That can be preferable because it will leave this PR in tact to show the progression and not clobber/disconnect the relationships between reviewer comments against individual pushes to the PR…

I don't want to fight the norm, because I'm eager for this improvement so we can use in other projects that were firing up the container with MANY more lines of application code 😉

DONE

Also, once complete I'll create a PR for this in 6.2 as well.

Awesome - yes, we're using the latest .Final version (6.2).

Hey… it would seem that, by default Undertow doesn't hook up its compression handler for responses, so this technique can be used to do that too.

Any ETA for the next release that would include this feature with it?

I'm hoping to get it done this week. Sorry for the delay.

I see it landed today 🎉 thanks!

Yes, sorry for the delay. Last week ended up getting away from me.