+1 Mac OS X (PPC/10.4.6), Apache 2.0.55 (mpm/worker), Python 2.3.5
(OS standard version), mod_python-3.2.9-rc3
+1 Mac OS X (PPC/10.4.6), Apache 2.2.1 (mpm/worker), Python 2.3.5 (OS
standard version), mod_python-3.2.9-rc3
On 26/06/2006, at 1:44 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
The mod_python 3.2.9-rc
PSP error page accessing session object can cause a deadlock.
-
Key: MODPYTHON-175
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-175
Project: mod_python
Type: Bug
Versions: 3.2.8
Reporter:
PSP.run() should not unlock session if it didn't create it.
---
Key: MODPYTHON-176
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-176
Project: mod_python
Type: Improvement
Versions: 3.2.8
Repor
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-38?page=comments#action_12418012
]
Graham Dumpleton commented on MODPYTHON-38:
---
Some of the unfinished session object issues in this entry split out into
MODPYTHON-175 and MODPYTHON-176.
This entr
+1 FreeBSD 6.1 / Apache 2.2 / Python 2.4.3
On 6/25/06, Jim Gallacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The mod_python 3.2.9-rc3 tarball is available for testing. This release
adds support for apache 2.2 as well as some other useful backports from
the development branch. For information on the changes f
Having written most of the issue "93" code, here's my opinion:
* How much non-compatibility is acceptable in a patch release?
None.
Though it hurts my personal feelings that my patch did manage to break
something (who imagined anyone trying to hack data into the FS object?),
we cannot break
Mike Looijmans wrote:
> Having written most of the issue "93" code, here's my opinion:
>
>> * How much non-compatibility is acceptable in a patch release?
>
> None.
> Though it hurts my personal feelings that my patch did manage to break
> something (who imagined anyone trying to hack data into t
Jim Gallacher wrote:
Mike Looijmans wrote:
I think this surprised many of us, as no one on the list seems to have
thought of that use case. Trac subclasses FieldStorage to get behaviour
more in line with cgi.py. We don't have any prohibitions on subclassing,
so although we didn't foresee this us
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
> So do you think we can release 3.2.9 with the old 3.2.8 code, or should
> this block the release until we have a correct fix? I'm hoping we can do
> a 3.3 release in October or November, FYI.
I don't think it is worth trying to work on a fix that makes new
FieldStorage cod
