2010/2/1 Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>: > On 01/02/2010 02:04, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >> 2010/2/1 <ma...@apache.org>: >>> Author: markt >>> Date: Mon Feb 1 00:08:07 2010 >>> New Revision: 905147 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=905147&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Update proposal with fix. >>> Remove Konstantin's vote as this is a very different patch >>> >>> Modified: >>> tomcat/tc5.5.x/trunk/STATUS.txt >>> >> >>> Concerns were raised regarding possible regressions. I have tested tag >>> files, >>> simple tags and tags and can't find any regression issues. The TCK also >>> passes. >>> - http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=804734&view=rev >>> - +1: kkolinko >>> - -1: markt - The concerns were valid. The patch caused bug 48616. >>> + http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=804734&view=rev (original fix) >>> + http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=905145&view=rev (correction to original >>> fix) >>> + +1: markt >>> + -1: >>> >> >> Mark, I saw that you reverted 804734 in TC6 (rev. 905015), so >> probably only the second one is needed here, (and to add 905015 to >> TC6 proposal?) > > 905145 won't apply cleanly unless 804734 is applied although 905145 does > completely undo the effects of 804734. > > I could have produced a combined patch that would apply cleanly that > wouldn't include the 804734 change but it was getting late when I did > this :) >
It would be better to prepare a patch file, if you have time for that. I tried to merge 905145 to tc6.0.x, and it resulted in conflicts. By the way, a misprint: s/isImplemetedAsFragment/isImplementedAsFragment/ Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
