On Sun, 3 Jan 2016, Simon Legner wrote:
On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Simon Legner wrote:
what about an expert (for now) option (such as prefer.ipv6=jvm) to
disable JOSM's algorithm completely and solely rely on the JVM to
figure out the correct way to connect to a server?
I checked the c
On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Simon Legner wrote:
> what about an expert (for now) option (such as prefer.ipv6=jvm) to
> disable JOSM's algorithm completely and solely rely on the JVM to
> figure out the correct way to connect to a server?
I checked the code: This should already work w/o any c
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016, Simon Legner wrote:
what about an expert (for now) option (such as prefer.ipv6=jvm) to
disable JOSM's algorithm completely and solely rely on the JVM to
figure out the correct way to connect to a server? According to [1] …
IPv6 in Java is transparent and automatic. Porting i
Hi all,
what about an expert (for now) option (such as prefer.ipv6=jvm) to
disable JOSM's algorithm completely and solely rely on the JVM to
figure out the correct way to connect to a server? According to [1] …
> IPv6 in Java is transparent and automatic. Porting is not necessary; there is
> no n
sent from a phone
> Am 01.01.2016 um 21:37 schrieb Russ Nelson :
>
> Never ask for confirmations. It's never the right thing to do unless
> you're very short of resources, which we never are these days.
that's not exactly true, you can always come to the limits, especially when
working with
If we never ask for confirmations then you would be able to quit JOSM
while it has modified data. There can be no notice about saved changes
at that point. The earliest time to display that notice would be the
next JOSM start. But the data might have changed on the server in the
meantime. In th
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016, Florian Lohoff wrote:
Just let the very first DNS request for josm.openstreetmap.org
fail/timeout - You get a popup "Network errors occured"
and "Change proxy setting". This is abolute nonesense. I dont
use any proxy - A simple DNS query failed - Thats life. I might
even be o
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016, Florian Lohoff wrote:
If you go into the future you will have IPv6 only. No IPv4 fallback.
And it has to work. Yes - we currently have a chance to try again
with IPv4 and JOSM doesn't use that chance. Well, JOSM doesn't do
many other things as well.
IPv4 will not go away. I
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 02:03:57PM +0100, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
> I also don't believe that's a JOSM issue, as JOSM does not remember
> any states between connections. Maybe your connection is simply to
> slow and you need to increase the timeouts so it works for your
> system. JOSM uses reasonable t
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 02:03:57PM +0100, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> >Currently josm tries to be clever and either does v6 or v4 and tries
> >to detect whether the host is v6 enabled. This is broken by design.
> >You cant detect whether you will be able to
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 09:12:50PM +0100, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016, Philip Homburg wrote:
>
> >- Ideally, operating systems should ship with a happy eyeballs implementation
> > in the C library. I don't know any that does. It is not such a great idea
> > for applications to roll th
11 matches
Mail list logo