Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

@RequestMapping without @Controller registered as handler [SPR-17622] #22154

spring-issuemaster opened this issue Dec 23, 2018 · 5 comments


Copy link

@spring-issuemaster spring-issuemaster commented Dec 23, 2018

Eugene Tenkaev opened SPR-17622 and commented

Following this approach here

If you add root @RequestMapping to the UserService it will be registered as handler in Spring MVC application.

Example project to reproduce here

Related discussions:

To handle this properly need to avoid registration of controller that has only @RequestMapping annotation.

Proposed solution:
Register handler only if it has annotation @Controller or @RestController.

Affects: 5.1.3

Issue Links:

  • #16747 Introduce proxy-based REST client similar to HttpInvokerProxyFactoryBean

1 votes, 3 watchers


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@spring-issuemaster spring-issuemaster commented Dec 24, 2018

Sébastien Deleuze commented

I understand the rationale behind what you ask, but class level @Component + @RequestMapping is supported for a long time, so removing that support would break a lot of applications.

Rossen Stoyanchev Arjen Poutsma Could you share your point of view on this change request?


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@spring-issuemaster spring-issuemaster commented Dec 24, 2018

Eugene Tenkaev commented

Sébastien Deleuze I have edit description the idea is next:
Make Spring MVC register endpoint only if it has @Controller or @RestController on the class level.

My example shows that:
Right now, if class has only @RequestMapping - this class will be registered as the endpoint in Spring MVC.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@spring-issuemaster spring-issuemaster commented Dec 25, 2018

Sébastien Deleuze commented

I understand, but what I wanted to clarify is that @RequestMapping alone does not expose endpoints automatically, but beans with class level @RequestMapping annotations does and this is used by developers in various ways, one of these ways being my @Component + @RequestMapping example.

@FeignClient itself is not meta annotated with @Component, but I guess it is registered as a bean by FeignClientFactoryBean (I have not verified) which is from Spring Framework POV similar to @Component + @RequestMapping or programmatic bean registration of classes annotated by @RequestMapping.

I understand your request for being more restrictive in how we identify REST endpoints, and the issue raised for @FeignClient could apply for #16747. But I am also concern by such breaking change, that's why I am asking Rossen and Arjen feedback who have more knowledge and context than me on that topic.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@rstoyanchev rstoyanchev commented Jan 18, 2019

Class level @RequestMapping is used as a hint, independent of @Controller, because @RequestMapping can be used on an interface, in which case the controller can be an AOP proxy and the @Controller annotation is not accessible to Spring MVC through the proxy.

@jhoeller do you see any options to refine the checks, e.g. if type-level @RequestMapping is found without @Controller and the bean is a proxy, then introspect further to see if we can find the @Controller annotation?

Note also that Spring Data REST has a similar situation for REST endpoints, and it solves that through an additional RequestMappingHandlerMapping instance ordered earlier + a special stereotype to identify such endpoints, which works but is probably more involved than it needs to be. We could also try and suppress Spring MVC from treating certain types (based on some criteria) as controllers but again that doesn't seem ideal and requires extra config.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@remal remal commented Jul 5, 2019

This issue leads to a lot of different problems that are very hard to debug. Please fix it. I can suggest these solutions:

  1. Do not treat classes annotated by @RequestMapping as handlers. Only @Controller annotation should be taken into consideration.
  2. Spring Data has @NoRepositoryBean. A similar annotation can be created for request handlers. For example: @NoRequestHandler.
    • In this case @FeignClient annotation can be annotated by this @NoRequestHandler annotation.

I'd suggest implementing the first solution.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.