Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-03 Thread Bojan Smojver
Bojan Smojver wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I don't think I can do this alone ( if it sounded like I volunteer to fix > > it - well, I need help ). > > > - Test. > > I'm one of those overly brave and too stupid that put CVS versions of > software in production environment. Promise

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread GOMEZ Henri
TED]] >Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 10:52 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() > > >I thought you were talking about the mod_jk in the TC3.3 >branch. If you're talking j-t-c only, then I don't mind an >Option, as long

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread Keith Wannamaker
1 11:24 AM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() | | | >Why can't we implement the 3.3 collaborative solution in 4.0 ? | >That would maintain compatibility. | | And also in TC 3.2.4 ? | | >I just hate to provide an option which could re

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread GOMEZ Henri
worst, it will >generate erroneous bug reports. I'd hesitate to >add it. The Option could be hidden and use the TC 3.3 behaviour by default... > >| -Original Message- >| From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >| Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 10:35 AM >| To: [EM

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread Keith Wannamaker
orts. I'd hesitate to add it. Keith | -Original Message- | From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 10:35 AM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() | | | >What whould happen in 3.3 if ForwardEsc

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>What whould happen in 3.3 if ForwardEscapedURI was chosen? >Wouldn't the facade escape it again? > My goal in mod_jk is to keep compatibility with ALL tomcat release, TC 3.2, 3.3 and 4.0. The option will let us configure it, even if by default mod_jk found in TC 3.3 and J-T-C will use the TC

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread Keith Wannamaker
ge- | >| From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | >| Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 5:18 AM | >| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | >| Subject: RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() | >| | >| | >| | >| >- Revert jk/apache to use uri, remove the encode call ( |

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread GOMEZ Henri
t;| Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 5:18 AM >| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >| Subject: RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() >| >| >| >| >- Revert jk/apache to use uri, remove the encode call ( >again, j-t and >| >j-t-c - one more week to do that, after that we

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread Keith Wannamaker
n Option? Keith | -Original Message- | From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] | Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 5:18 AM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() | | | | >- Revert jk/apache to use uri, remove the encode call ( again, j-t

RE: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-10-01 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>- Revert jk/apache to use uri, remove the encode call ( again, j-t and >j-t-c - one more week to do that, after that we'll be j-t-c >only ). Henri >- could you do this and the next one ? I'll reintroduce the JkOptions which will help us play with different encoding : ForwardStandardURI : wil

Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-09-30 Thread cmanolache
rom: "Bill Barker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Bill Barker" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 12:40 AM > Subject: Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() > > > >

Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-09-30 Thread Bill Barker
EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 12:40 AM Subject: Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() > Actually, my original was a straight java.net.URLEncode after stripping out > the session id. However, I'm easy. Attached is using UEncoder (which I > initiall

Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-09-30 Thread Bill Barker
Barker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 1:23 AM Subject: Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI() > On Sat, 29 Sep 2001, Bill Barker wrote: > > > It seems that I must have been bad in a past life, since my Karma isn't high >

Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-09-29 Thread cmanolache
On Sat, 29 Sep 2001, Bill Barker wrote: > It seems that I must have been bad in a past life, since my Karma isn't high > enough.:) > > I've added the code to re-encode the URL to DecodeInterceptor on my machine. > If you want it right away, I can post a diff. Hi, Could you send the diff, I'll h

Re: Volunteers for: - RE: TC 3.3: getRequestURI()

2001-09-29 Thread Bill Barker
It seems that I must have been bad in a past life, since my Karma isn't high enough.:) I've added the code to re-encode the URL to DecodeInterceptor on my machine. If you want it right away, I can post a diff. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fr