] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 8:36 PM
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: RE: Rename jK2 to mod_jk2 ?
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
Any objection to see JkMount renamed to Jk2Mount in mod_jk2
and in general all Directive subject to collisions
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
So JkMount in Jk2 will point to NOP ?
No, it'll be commented out ( as long as we use jk in parallel with jk2 ).
( to avoid name conflicts ).
When jk2 is ready and we decide it's time to stop supporting jk1, we
can add back JkMount for backward
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 5:01 PM
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: RE: Rename jK2 to mod_jk2 ?
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
So JkMount in Jk2 will point to NOP ?
No, it'll be commented out ( as long as we use jk in parallel
with jk2 ).
( to avoid name
Any objection to see JkMount renamed to Jk2Mount in mod_jk2
and in general all Directive subject to collisions with the
original mod_jk...
The both could be installed at the same time ...
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
Any objection to see JkMount renamed to Jk2Mount in mod_jk2
and in general all Directive subject to collisions with the
original mod_jk...
I have one :-)
If we change JkMount, I would rather change it into nothing ( i.e.
get rid of it ). It should
GOMEZ Henri wrote:
What about renaming native2 (jk2) in JTC to mod_jk2
and jk2_module ?
If we consider native2 as a remplacement for the native of mod_jk, no. That is
just a new version.
If you thing of easy testing may be... I have libjk.so from native and mod_jk.so
from native2 and I
If we consider native2 as a remplacement for the native of
mod_jk, no. That is
just a new version.
If you thing of easy testing may be... I have libjk.so from
native and mod_jk.so
from native2 and I stop/start Apache for testing both.
The idea is that native2 will replace more or less quickly
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
What about renaming native2 (jk2) in JTC to mod_jk2
and jk2_module ?
+1 if you talk about the binary. -0 if you talk about directory/file
names.
In mod_jk2 we already removed a lot of 'public' symbols that could
conflict if both modules are loaded.
What about renaming native2 (jk2) in JTC to mod_jk2
and jk2_module ?
+1 if you talk about the binary. -0 if you talk about directory/file
names.
No only source/binary, without touching anything in CVS layout.
It will be need to rename all non static references,
variables functions, but I
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
I agree with changing the names of non-statics in native2,
but need more time to think about changing dir names. There
are build files, cvs history, habbits that will change as well.
No change in CVS tree, just in source to avoid conflict
between
No change in CVS tree, just in source to avoid conflict
between mod_jk(s) even if one is a jk_module and the
other jk2_module
Rigth now, I'll wait for JTC developpers 'green ligth' to
do the changes in JTC native2 ONLY :)
Green light from me. It's an excelent idea.
Now a small
11 matches
Mail list logo
