Gokul Singh wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Hans Bergsten" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gokul Singh wrote:
Hans Bergsten wrote:
[...]
I am trying to disallow a single user to have multiple login sessions
valid at any given time. I have to enforce this even if the user
Bug report #766 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/766
REPORT #766 Details.
Project: Catalina
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: high
Severity: critical
At 12:10 15/1/01 -0800, Jon Stevens wrote:
Actually NOTHING has been debated OR decided on any of the closed lists. I
wonder how many times I (and others) need to repeat that to you before you
actually hear and acknowledge it.
every time it arises or there is conflict - thats the joy of closed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I think I have to clear few things up.
I already announced ( probably not clearly enough ) my intention to give
up and spend my free time in better ways. This is a form of vote, BTW.
As far as I can recall, you been saying that, but you have also
said you
Bug report #767 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/767
REPORT #767 Details.
Project: Tomcat
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: high
Severity: serious
Bug #37 Details
Project: Tomcat
Category: Feature Requests
SubCategory: Enhancement
Class: swbug
State: open
Priority: high
Severity: serious
Confidence: public
Environment:
Release: 3.1
JVM Release: SE linux1.3.0b7
Operating System: linux
OS Release: 2.2
Platform: i686
I would not call them "template engineers", but I already called them
scripters.
Anyway, I am sure there is an intermediate class of coders and there
are much more of them (with different degrees of skill) than of the
so called "Java engineers".
My experience is that they are able to take over
Same feeling here.
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 15:35
I think in the long run, the community will be better served by a released
3.3. It may have some different bugs, but I think it will eventually have
Bug report #768 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/768
REPORT #768 Details.
Project: Tomcat
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: low
Severity: non-critical
Craig R. McClanahan typed the following on 03:44 PM 1/14/2001 -0800
"Christopher K. St. John" wrote:
If your server implements session swapping or distribution (as we are
currently
developing in the 4.1 repository), it is pretty much guaranteed that
different
session object instances
Costin, tried to send this to you privately, but yahoo gave me this when i
tried to send to your account:
Your message was rejected by mx1.mail.yahoo.com for the following reason:
delivery error: dd This user doesn't have a yahoo.com account
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - mta227.mail.yahoo.com
Ok
Gokul Singh wrote:
Hans Bergsten wrote:
> [...]
> The spec may not be explicit enough about this, but the session object
> you get back from the getSession() object is a container-managed
object
> that the application is not supposed/allowed to keep long-lived
> references
> to. It's the same
Hello all,my name Alexey Volovoy and i'm java/xml
developer , recently i start working with JSP.
I was trying to use JSP command line compiler in
tomcat 4.0. Got the following error
2001-01-15 11:01:49 - ERROR-the file '\snoop.jsp'
generated the following genera
l exception:
Kief Morris wrote:
Craig R. McClanahan typed the following on 03:44 PM 1/14/2001 -0800
"Christopher K. St. John" wrote:
If your server implements session swapping or distribution (as we are
currently
developing in the 4.1 repository), it is pretty much guaranteed that
different
on 1/15/01 9:52 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again - 3.x is the only reason I'm still here, and I want to finish it as
soon as possible and be free.
In case you missed it, no software is *ever* "done". If you think you can
just do another release and then stop all work on
GOMEZ Henri wrote:
[finally ... a technical issue!]
I still didn't understand why TC 4.0 didn't select mod_jk as
their connector to WebServer. The code is clean and many bugs
are removed. A web server connector is not an easy piece of cake
so why reinvent the whell ?-(
Tomcat
Craig R. McClanahan typed the following on 11:42 AM 1/15/2001 -0800
- If it is OK, should the container send activation/passivation events when a
session is being serialized (or whatever) for replication purposes?
The following comment is in the Javadocs at the top of
Jon Stevens typed the following on 11:50 AM 1/15/2001 -0800
Right, but I (and others) are still here and myself (and others) are still
in a responsible position for supporting this software. Therefore, I'm most
concerned with a developer who makes a huge number of changes and then
announces that
Bug report #771 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/771
REPORT #771 Details.
Project: Tomcat
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: medium
Severity: critical
I typed the following on 03:10 PM 1/15/2001 -0500
If Manager.releaseSession() method is implemented (I don't really like that
method name though), then StandardSession.expire() and invalidate() should
call it, and maybe some other places.
Doh, actually the locking would probably be implemented
Bug report #772 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/772
REPORT #772 Details.
Project: Tomcat
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: high
Severity: serious
Has anyone shown any interest in developing a Tomcat 4.0 connector for IIS?
If not this is actually something that I'd like to work on. Unfortuntely,
it is going to be a month or more before I could devote a lot of time to it.
-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan
Jon Stevens typed the following on 12:36 PM 1/15/2001 -0800
Costin's choice is his choice. If he doesn't want to stick around, it won't
be because of me (or at least I don't think I can understand that as an
argument...maybe my fault, maybe not), it will be because of the fact that
the project
Hi Glenn,
I had a few questions/comments on:
Jasper JSP class loading
The work directory will be moved inside the web application context
/WEB-INF/ directory. This will make security configuration easier
and security checks more efficient. The jasper work dir for a context
would be
Jon,
On the TinderBox/CJAN topic, how much earlier than the meeting should we
arrive?
Scott Sanders
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On the TinderBox/CJAN topic, how much earlier than the meeting
should we arrive?
I plan to be there around 10ish.
- Sam Ruby
Since this is very interesting, I will plan on arriving shortly thereafter.
Thanks
Scott Sanders
on 1/15/01 12:56 PM, "Kief Morris" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that's _your_ reason for thinking he should go. I get the impression
his own reasons for saying he wants to go has a lot more to do with the
pressure he's getting to either conform to the party line or get lost. What
you say
GOMEZ Henri wrote:
Not a problem of room but a legal problem of distributions.
Yep, he knows - he's on the JAXP team.
Solution : Sun give jaxp 1.0 and 1.1 to Apache Foundation ;-)
Duncan is working on the problem.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Rajiv Mordani
And you are being the usual pain too.
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 21:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Jakarta PMC Meeting Agenda / Info
on 1/15/01 12:17 PM, "Kief Morris" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If
The saga goes on...
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 22:17
Now, he wants to go against what everyone voted for by continuing on with
the development of Tomcat 3.x indefinitely. I'm going to call him on that
because I
No. What I am saying is that as a group, we choose to go in a certain
direction and voted on it (with zero -1's).
Let me refer you to this link (again):
http://w6.metronet.com/~wjm/tomcat/2000/Aug/index.html#00195
You can also try reading:
Since you've posted the URL again, I went back and read the initial proposal
again. Each time I read the proposal, I'm left with the same thoughts.
First, let me quote part Craig's message that started the thread and the
voting:
"To facilitate development of Tomcat 4.0, without compromising
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 20:50
on 1/15/01 9:52 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again - 3.x is the only reason I'm still here, and I want to
finish it as
soon as possible and be free.
In
on 1/15/01 2:20 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many people feel that 3.3 is the safest bet for the next year. Some of us
want to keep real world production sites running with real world
constraints. Those of us can postpone using the beautiful new features of
Catalina but still
You must go to the list and post a clear statement that you will fight
until the end to finish what you started - 1st inside tomcat and, if
not possible, even outside Tomcat.
Please don't attack anyone, don't fight anyone, don't argument about
past elections and decisions - Jon and others
on 1/15/01 2:15 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. What I am saying is that as a group, we choose to go in a certain
direction and voted on it (with zero -1's).
Let me refer you to this link (again):
http://w6.metronet.com/~wjm/tomcat/2000/Aug/index.html#00195
You
on 1/15/01 2:32 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not going to fork tomcat3, nor to abandon it - but for any new
features and ideas I'll use a separate workspace, where I can work
without fighting.
--
Costin
Great! I encourage you to do so!
-jon
--
Honk if you love
on 1/15/01 2:25 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, it is much more responsible to push for another release that is
easier to maintain by others than just leave it as it is. And that seems to
be the case with Costin and 3.3.
Can you please give me concrete evidence that
on 1/15/01 2:09 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on this and the actual proposed "long term plans" that followed, I'm
not sure how this thread addresses when 3.x code development should end.
It doesn't. That is why we are having a PMC meeting and why this whole flame
war
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 23:34
on 1/15/01 2:25 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, it is much more responsible to push for another
release that is
easier to maintain by others than just
2) When a revolution is ready for prime time, the committer proposes a
merge to the -dev list. At that time, the overall community evaluates
whether or not the code is ready to become part of, or to
potentially replace the, trunk. Suggestions may be made, changes may be
required. Once
fact, in that same thread, there seemed to be support for ongoing
enhancements on the 3.x code line, even to the point of supporting the
latest specs:
http://w6.metronet.com/~wjm/tomcat/2000/Aug/msg00486.html
Correct. However, that was never proposed or agreed upon.
Of course, what
on 1/15/01 3:08 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you please give me concrete evidence against?
Beacuase you are the one against the flow on that one.
Everybody that knows both says 3.3 is better than 3.2. Are they all
wrong?
Like I said. That isn't what is being
on 1/15/01 3:05 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) When a revolution is ready for prime time, the committer proposes a
merge to the -dev list. At that time, the overall community evaluates
whether or not the code is ready to become part of, or to
potentially replace the,
on 1/15/01 3:09 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, what you don't like is either "not proposed or agreed" or "not
justified " ( the -1 votes against you ) or "not agreed by the PMC".
And what you want is "what the community want".
--
Costin
P.S. - ops, it
Like I said. That isn't what is being questioned.
Your favorite answer when a better one is missing.
But I thing this is the question.
* Isn't Open Source Software community driven?
* Isn't 3.3 being wanted because of being better at least for the short
term the reason why some members of
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 00:49
on 1/15/01 3:05 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it was about moving catalina in a separate CVS and implementing
servlet 2.3 and calling it tomcat 4.0.
on 1/15/01 4:13 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your favorite answer when a better one is missing.
No. I don't have time to answer things that clearly aren't relevant.
But I thing this is the question.
* Isn't Open Source Software community driven?
Depends on how you define
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 01:12
on 1/15/01 4:13 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Or are we supposed to only scratch the itches you approve?
That is a fucked up question. I'm not being a
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 00:57
...as well as a split project's resources.
Again, where does it stop? Maybe if you had stated that you wanted to
eventually switch to working on Tomcat 4.x, I would have had some
on 1/15/01 4:24 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Several members want to go on with 3.3 and the only one I see making a big
fuss of stopping it its you.
I don't know what the *fuck* you are talking about.
-jon
--
From: Jon Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL
on 1/15/01 4:36 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, Apache is the boss of Costin and pays him to do work on Tomcat 4 but he
works on 3.3 instead?
How voluntary is voluntary work here?
(Tell me please, before I contribute with something and become Jon's slave!)
Paulo, try
Talk about rudeness!
=:o)
I have seen that posting with the +1 votes before.
Does it erase what followed?
Have fun,
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 01:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Jakarta PMC Meeting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Are you saying that a proposal that got 6 commiter votes ( which happen to
be the full PMC, except Sam, plus Remy ) are representing the whole
project ?
I'm preparing for the meeting tomorrow, so I'm interested in getting
as much input as possible. I've gone
Paulo, try harder. I'm sure you will understand what I'm trying to say
instead of constantly trying to turn things around into something they are
not.
-jon
I am afraid that's more like your technique. You even omitted this bit from
your posting where you make some pressure on how Costin
This makes a lot of sense to me.
Have fun,
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hans
Bergsten
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 01:53
The motivation for two separate repositories for TC 3.x and 4.x in the
proposal says (among
So, Apache is the boss of Costin and pays him to do work on Tomcat 4 but
he
works on 3.3 instead?
Nearly all the open-source projects out there have a "boss" who gets to
decide whether or not they like your stuff. If you fail to convince them
that your stuff is the One and Only Good Way to do
Nearly all the open-source projects out there have a "boss" who gets to
decide whether or not they like your stuff.
Perfect, but as Hans mentioned, there was never a decision to stop 3.3.
And I have been seing much more rants and FUD from Jon, "which doesn't
help anyone".
And my problem is
on 1/15/01 5:13 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This makes a lot of sense to me.
Have fun,
Paulo
Finally someone gets through to you.
I also agree with Hans 100%.
-jon
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
on 1/15/01 4:59 PM, "Remy Maucherat" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, Apache is the boss of Costin and pays him to do work on Tomcat 4 but
he
works on 3.3 instead?
Nearly all the open-source projects out there have a "boss" who gets to
decide whether or not they like your stuff. If you fail
on 1/15/01 5:22 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perfect, but as Hans mentioned, there was never a decision to stop 3.3.
Exactly why this meeting is happening and my original [MY_OPINION] thread
started.
And I have been seing much more rants and FUD from Jon, "which doesn't
help
What happens if a 3.3 proposal gets a -1?
From the whole content of your posting I understand that the 3.3
existence is legal.
What happens if it is proposed again and gets -1.
What is the difference from voting to stop it?
(What am I understanding wrong?)
Have fun,
Paulo
-Original
The one person having problems is you. And it is not only with me that
you are having them anyway.
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 02:11
on 1/15/01 5:13 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This
As a consequence, I feel that this decision means that Tomcat 3.x can
*not* implement Servlet 2.3/JSP 1.2, since it would be very confusing
for both developers and users with two code bases supporting the same
API levels within the same project.
While I disagree with that, I already did what
on 1/15/01 5:35 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The one person having problems is you. And it is not only with me that
you are having them anyway.
Paulo
What problems do I have again?
Lets see, I can think of a few:
I don't want to maintain code/resources for which the lead
on 1/15/01 5:38 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You opinion is EVERYWHERE!
What is wrong with that? I'm an active developer on this project. Suddenly
I'm not allowed to have an opinion on things?
Exactly what FUD have I spread?
Was it only rants then?
Was *what* only rants?
Nearly all the open-source projects out there have a "boss" who gets to
decide whether or not they like your stuff. If you fail to convince them
that your stuff is the One and Only Good Way to do things
Well, so far I believed that in apache projects the developers who
actively work on
Rather than add fuel to the fire, I would like to summarize what I need
out of a servlet engine. Hopefully this will help the members of the PMC
make the correct decisions based off of what users need.
High Priority:
* Stability
We've been running Tomcat 3.1 without any problems for
BugRat Mail System wrote:
Bug report #771 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/771
REPORT #771 Details.
Project: Tomcat
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State:
on 1/15/01 5:41 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those are the "Jon's rules" I was talking about before.
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 02:30
My mistake - it is of course a "project
What problems do I have again?
Lets see, I can think of a few:
I don't want to maintain code/resources for which the lead developer has
disappeared.
The lead developer for Tomcat has disappeared 1 year ago ( from any active
development or support in tomcat, he's still around doing other
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a consequence, I feel that this decision means that Tomcat 3.x can
*not* implement Servlet 2.3/JSP 1.2, since it would be very confusing
for both developers and users with two code bases supporting the same
API levels within the same project.
While I
Hi,
I noticed that the list is starting to devolve a little so perhaps the
opinion of a complete outsider with no bias (that I am aware of) could help ;)
From what I understand the main objections of a 3.2 are
1. You don't want to have 2 different containers implementing 2.3 under Apache
2. You
Paulo Gaspar wrote:
What happens if a 3.3 proposal gets a -1?
Unless another committer can convince whoever votes -1 to change
his vote, it means that 3.3 will not happen. Instead we will
continue to maintain the 3.x code base based on 3.2.1. That's
how decision making is defined for this
It is so funny, we keep going back and forth over stuff that is clearly
Costin's FUD. He is attacking me directly with FUD and you are
believing it.
No it is not. The expression "Jon's rules" just has to do with the way
you push things down other people's throats. And when things don't go the
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 02:30
on 1/15/01 5:38 PM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You opinion is EVERYWHERE!
What is wrong with that? I'm an active developer on this project. Suddenly
I'm not
Exactly the same priorities here.
Paulo Gaspar
-Original Message-
From: Paul Frieden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 02:38
Rather than add fuel to the fire, I would like to summarize what I need
out of a servlet engine. Hopefully this will help the
Jon, It is the 2nd time I see you making this kind of remark and it stinks.
This kind of argumentation is quite dirty, even for you.
Paulo Gaspar
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 03:13
on 1/15/01 5:58 PM, "[EMAIL
Thank you very much Hans.
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hans
Bergsten
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 03:05
Paulo Gaspar wrote:
What happens if a 3.3 proposal gets a -1?
[...very clear clarification...]
Agreed!
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 02:55
Hi,
I noticed that the list is starting to devolve a little so perhaps the
opinion of a complete outsider with no bias (that I am aware of)
could help ;)
Since you usually agree with Hans and everybody else does too, maybe
he is just a much better communicator than you and maybe he is doing
a much better job.
So, why don't you just follow the very good advise?
Have fun,
Paulo
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL
Bug report #773 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/773
REPORT #773 Details.
Project: Catalina
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: high
Severity: serious
Paulo, cut the shit. I'm 23 and I have the requisite maturity to not behave
like this. If you want to talk, talk, but enough attacking/provoking Jon.
- r
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Bug report #775 has just been filed.
You can view the report at the following URL:
http://znutar.cortexity.com/BugRatViewer/ShowReport/775
REPORT #775 Details.
Project: Catalina
Category: Bug Report
SubCategory: New Bug Report
Class: swbug
State: received
Priority: high
Severity: serious
Yes, poor Jon!!!
I was the one that started and all hum?
Have fun,
Paulo
P.S.: It was just an interesting one day experiment: trying to be as
insisting as him and never quit (as he usualy doesn't). I can tell you
I will not repeat it very often - takes too much of my time.
-Original
Jon Stevens wrote:
on 1/15/01 5:58 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The lead developer for Tomcat has disappeared 1 year ago ( from any active
development or support in tomcat, he's still around doing other projects
). That's BTW the best prove of a project viability.
Yes, but you seem to create a lot of confusion about how and where
you will implement support for the new APIs eventually. That, I
believe, is one of the main reasons we have the current situation.
You said back in November that you where going to start a revolution
for the 2.3 stuff, as
on 1/15/01 7:18 PM, "Anil Vijendran" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What the f*ck is it, really?!
The two points I have brought up are:
#1. that Costin didn't make a vote in the ASF because his boss @ Sun didn't
let him.
#2. that his employer also tried to pull him off the project by giving him
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:
on 1/15/01 3:09 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, what you don't like is either "not proposed or agreed" or "not
justified " ( the -1 votes against you ) or "not agreed by the PMC".
And what you want is "what the
on 1/15/01 7:39 PM, "Rajiv Mordani" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Jon Stevens wrote:
on 1/15/01 3:09 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, what you don't like is either "not proposed or agreed" or "not
justified " ( the -1 votes against you ) or "not
The two points I have brought up are:
#1. that Costin didn't make a vote in the ASF because his boss @ Sun didn't
let him.
It's actually Craig that complained to my boss. The rules were that we are
free to work on anything we want in our free time, and that we can
freely express our
The history is what is important here. The fact of the matter is that if Sun
had not donated Tomcat 3.x, we would already be using a much more complete
Catalina as Craig had already started work on it and was pulled off from
Well, check the jserv archives and let us know how many people
on 1/15/01 8:16 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The history is what is important here. The fact of the matter is that if Sun
had not donated Tomcat 3.x, we would already be using a much more complete
Catalina as Craig had already started work on it and was pulled off from
on 1/15/01 8:21 PM, "Jon Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still agree with that. In fact, the feature requests that have come
through today by the users even stated that they would only be using it by
connecting to Tomcat.
s/Tomcat/Apache/
sorry...long day of typing...
-jon
--
Honk if
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but you seem to create a lot of confusion about how and where
you will implement support for the new APIs eventually. That, I
believe, is one of the main reasons we have the current situation.
You said back in November that you where going to start a
This pretty much summarizes today...
LOL!
-jon
--
This assignment was actually turned in by two English students: Rebecca
Gary (last names deleted).
English 44A SMU, Creative Writing Prof. Miller "In-class Assignment
for Wednesday".
"Today we will experiment with a new form called
on 1/15/01 8:10 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you argue about how Valve's single chain of command ( where
authentication, generation, etc are done in a single invoke() ) can be
better than what all other server are doing ( and Apache 2.0 moves to a
different level with
About why - it's simple, because 2.3 is the next version and to have a
future we must keep up to date.
"We" here means you and those who follow you to sourceforge (or
wherever), I assume?
We means people who use tomcat 3.x or contribute to 3.x - it's not an EOL
product.
I'm not
Has anyone succeeded in building mod_jserv.so for AIX for the IBM HTTP
Server (not Apache). I've figured out how to build the module for Apache,
but not for the IBM HTTP Server. There is a -DAFPA directive, and there is
some code in mod_jserv.c that seems to distinguish between the IBM HTTP
The reasons why there are advantages for (at least) the next year or so
on having both 3.3 and 4.x were already stated so often today...
...and also how 3.3 commiters are scratching an itch and will not focus
on 4.x while the itch is there...
How is your short term memory doing?
What is your
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
