On 15/09/2023 19:34, Mark Thomas wrote:
I tend to agree with sticking with 1.x. However, it appears I was
underestimating somewhat when I said Tomcat had a "few" commits that 1.x
didn't have.
I still think this is the way to go but there are ~3 years worth of
commits to work through. Also,
On 15/09/2023 18:55, Coty Sutherland wrote:
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 8:43 AM Rémy Maucherat wrote:
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 2:38 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
Since we have little choice for Tomcat 8.5.x and 9.0.x, I will be
aligning these branches with FileUpload 1.x first.
I'm not a huge fan of
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 8:43 AM Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 2:38 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Since the introduction of multi-part upload support in Servlet 3 (Tomcat
> > 7), Tomcat has used a package renamed fork of Commons FileUpload to
> > provide that suppor
Mark, Rémy,
On 9/15/23 08:43, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 2:38 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
All,
Since the introduction of multi-part upload support in Servlet 3 (Tomcat
7), Tomcat has used a package renamed fork of Commons FileUpload to
provide that support.
Recently, FileUpload
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 2:38 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Since the introduction of multi-part upload support in Servlet 3 (Tomcat
> 7), Tomcat has used a package renamed fork of Commons FileUpload to
> provide that support.
>
> Recently, FileUpload has undergone some major refactoring for 2
All,
Since the introduction of multi-part upload support in Servlet 3 (Tomcat
7), Tomcat has used a package renamed fork of Commons FileUpload to
provide that support.
Recently, FileUpload has undergone some major refactoring for 2.x to
modularise it to support different versions of the Serv
