Yeah, actually, in several projects I've used %CSP.REST to process the whole application. Static web files and REST itself. And the main cause to do so is that the internal webserver did not accept index.html as default index. So, it required to putting it manually to the URL, or using %CSP.REST, which work with static files, and correctly processes index.html. And it requires just one Web Application configured. But in case, when an application is partly anonymous, requires more attention to security.

Any reasons for doing this? This is not how it is supposed to be. REST should answer with Status 401, and optionally  with methods available. And web application when gets 401, it knows that it has to authorize the user, and shows its own page or initiates SSO, depending on the task.

Anyway, if really do this way, It looks like %CSP.REST extends %CSP.Login, and it has Method Login

Called for a REST page in the event of a login being required

Did not test it, but I would expect it will do what requested

Yeah, with docker it will be easier to offer a working environment

And we already have a lot of open-source projects, based on docker. But switching most of those projects from Community Edition to normal now will require additional configuration, on adding webserver container next to IRIS. And I think we should think already about it, and produce new projects, even on Community Edition, with WebServer as well. So, it will be easily switched for any reason.

Yeah, I would not expect less, from such an experienced man. But, I'm mainly worried about beginners. 

Offical Apache, does not offer any builds for Windows, it offers using 5 third-party projects, one of them with a dead link. And even mentioned by offering 4 different builds of the same version. And not everyone can easily decide which version is needed.

Seriously?

As you can find below, using IIS can be forbidden by company policy. And I totally agree with that.

Installing Apache on Windows, it's quite a trick. Fortunately, I'm not a windows user, but as far as I know, it's not so simple to find Apache on Windows, there are a few different builds of it.

And Installing nginx which will work with IRIS, even requires building it from source code, according to InterSystems Documentation

So, yes. I'm strictly staying with my position. That even installing a webserver may cause pain. And on top of that, if it will require a production-ready configuration, with restricted access, became even trickier.

The fact that it's still available in the Community Edition, does not mean that it will not be removed there too. And I'm sure not all developers, can use Community Edition in development, because, not all features are available in Community Edition, and it's very limited by the size of the database and connections (even after increasing). So, for most of the customers, it's rather impossible. But now, InterSystems I would say forcing to use it in development by any developer. So, I see, no reason of pushing Community Edition as an option for developers. It's a good alternative, but useful for a minor part of the developers.