Hi Sean,

It was indeed instable for a couple of hours yesterday but passes all the
tests now. However, the Servlet adapter is currently broken so I suggest
that you wait a bit more for the beta 19 release, hopefully released this
week.

Best regards,
Jerome  

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Sean Landis
> Envoyé : mardi 3 octobre 2006 21:03
> À : [email protected]
> Objet : Re: Surprising interaction between Call status and output
> 
> 
> 
> Jerome Louvel <contact <at> noelios.com> writes: 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Sean, 
> > 
> > I've fixed the issue in SVN. Thanks for the feed-back! 
> > 
> > Best regards, 
> > Jerome 
> 
> Thanks Jerome. I was hoping to get this change so 
> I checked out the HEAD and tried to build and got the following: 
> 
> test: 
>     [junit] Running com.noelios.restlet.test.NoeliosTestSuite 
>     [junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time 
> elapsed: 0.593 sec 
> 
> BUILD FAILED 
> /home/slandis/RestletDev/restlet/build.xml:528: Test 
> com.noelios.restlet.test.NoeliosTestSuite failed 
> 
> Is the SVN currently unstable, or am I missing a step? 
> 
> Thanks, 
> Sean 
> 
> > 
> > > -----Message d'origine----- 
> > > De : news [mailto:news <at> sea.gmane.org] De la part de 
> Sean Landis 
> > > Envoyé : vendredi 29 septembre 2006 20:40 
> > > À : discuss <at> restlet.tigris.org 
> > > Objet : Surprising interaction between Call status and output 
> > > 
> > > I have a web service (under Tomcat using the ServerServlet) 
> > > that accepts post 
> > > requests and returns a response. If the service encounters an 
> > > error, I desire to 
> > > set the Call status and provide my own XML in a 
> > > StringRepresentation. If I don't 
> > > set the status, my XML is returned fine. If I set the 
> status to say, 
> > > CLIENT_ERROR_BAD_REQUEST, then the output becomes: 
> > > 
> > > <html><head><title>Apache Tomcat/5.0 - Error 
> > > report</title><style><!--H1 
> > > ....etc..... 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I want my output, not this. Is there any way to avoid the 
> > > overwrite? I don't 
> > > think this is a good feature as it makes assumptions about 
> > > the use case. 
> > > 
> > > Thanks, 
> > > Sean 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to