/show_bug.cgi?id=5353
Characters with accents not displayed correctly in Tomcat 3.3
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2001-12-12 11:29 ---
One more good information.
If I create an HTML page with the same contents it works.
If I create a servlet that do something like
/show_bug.cgi?id=5353
Characters with accents not displayed correctly in Tomcat 3.3
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2001-12-12 14:37 ---
More information.
If I set the parameter largeFile=true in JspInterceptor, the page displays
OK.
html
body
p áéíóú âêîôû /p
/body
/html
Dear Tomcat 3.3 committers,
The atached two patches resolve character corruption problems when
Tomcat 3.3 lists directories or displays an error message in
non-ISO-8859-1 environments.
And I created Japanese resource bundles for Tomcat 3.3 according to
Henri Gomez's advice (Note: they requires
/show_bug.cgi?id=5353
Characters with accents not displayed correctly in Tomcat 3.3
Summary: Characters with accents not displayed correctly in
Tomcat 3.3
Product: Tomcat 3
Version: 3.3.x Nightly
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
/show_bug.cgi?id=5353
Characters with accents not displayed correctly in Tomcat 3.3
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Hi all,
I'm trying to upgrade from Tomcat 3.2 to Tomcat 3.3 and I have some jsp
pages that have caracteres with accents. With tomcat 3.3 it
outputs 'garbage' to the browser.
Example:
...
tdI have accents - áéíóú âêîôû/td
...
What am I missing ?
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail
-Original Message-
From: OGAWA, Motoyuki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Tomcat 3.3 Document Bug
Hello, My name is Ogawa, Motoyuki.
I am a Java engineer in Tokyo, Japan.
I found a bug in the Tomcat 3.3 document
/show_bug.cgi?id=5108
Docs for Tomcat 3.2.x appear to be for Tomcat 3.3
Summary: Docs for Tomcat 3.2.x appear to be for Tomcat 3.3
Product: Tomcat 3
Version: 3.2.3 Final
Platform: All
URL: http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-3.2-doc/mod_jk
-Original Message-
From: James Bromberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 7:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-3.3-doc/index.html
Hello,
I think there is a documentation bug on:
http://jakarta.apache.org
Message-
From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 3:29 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Thread pool problem in Tomcat 3.3 in Windows NT 4.0
There is a bug in ThreadPool that causes it to overwrite the
settings installed by the Ajp13Connector
Hi,
while fiddling around with the JDBCRealm I encountered a
NullPointerException. This happend when I specified a wrong
authentication database. However, instead of a reasonable error
message I got that NullPointerException.
It turned out to be a small bug in the StringManager. Here's a
/show_bug.cgi?id=4600
Tomcat 3.3 redirect behavior differs from Tomcat 3.2
Summary: Tomcat 3.3 redirect behavior differs from Tomcat 3.2
Product: Tomcat 3
Version: 3.3 Final
Platform: Sun
OS/Version: Solaris
Status: NEW
Severity
/show_bug.cgi?id=4600
Tomcat 3.3 redirect behavior differs from Tomcat 3.2
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2001-11-02 22:18 ---
This is basically a problem with a buggy client. The basic difference between
a 301 302 response is that the 301 is cachable (IMHO this is a good
/builds/jakarta-tomcat/release/v3.3/rpms/
tomcat-3.3-3.src.rpm
tomcat-3.3-3.noarch.rpm
tomcat-webapps-3.3-3.noarch.rpm
tomcat-manual-3.3-3.noarch.rpm
-
Henri Gomez ___[_]
EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED](. .)
PGP KEY
GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A little problem was discovered by Nicolas Mailhot,
in the tomcat 3.3, java part, with an incorrect tomcat
init script which wasn't used the new 'nobody' work mode.
Now tomcat run as nobody by default for security purposes.
The RPM has been updated
hi,
i need information on how to enable loadbalancing in a
one to many scenario (one apache - many tomcats at different
hosts) using apache 1.3.20, tomcat 3.3 and mod_jk.
i successfully enabled loadbalancing on one machine
(different ajp13-workers at the same port), but don't know
exactly how
A little problem was discovered by Nicolas Mailhot,
in the tomcat 3.3, java part, with an incorrect tomcat
init script which wasn't used the new 'nobody' work mode.
Now tomcat run as nobody by default for security purposes.
The RPM has been updated to -2 release and the old one
removed :
http
Servlet mappings in the web.xml file are intended for this purpose.
It should work in any version of Tomcat. Check out the
servlet and servlet-mapping web.xml elements in the
Servlet 2.2 or 2.3 spec.
If you can provide some more detail about what isn't working
in Tomcat 3.3, I'll try to help
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:16 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Tomcat 3.3 Final Released
At long last, Tomcat 3.3 has reached Final Release and is
available for
download. With its refactored set of core classes
NetWare connectors are now available.
Mike Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/22/01 02:16PM
At long last, Tomcat 3.3 has reached Final Release and is available for
download. With its refactored set of core classes and modules, it offers a
number of new features, better performance, and more
At long last, Tomcat 3.3 has reached Final Release and is available for
download. With its refactored set of core classes and modules, it offers a
number of new features, better performance, and more flexible configuration
over its predecessors. Also, it can be updated with add-on modules
The following is the vote tally for releasing the HEAD of jakarta-tomcat as
Tomcat 3.3:
Vote Total
+19
+01
-00
-10
I have some more documentation updates for tonight and early tomorrow after
which I will begin putting the final release together. I greatly
appreciate all
My own belated ...
+1
Had to sort some DDJ stuff out lately, but I'm back in live effect now, baby :)
Quoting Gomez Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Vote to release jakarta-tomcat HEAD as Tomcat 3.3
+1
¨
-
Henri Gomez ___[_]
EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi,
With the latest source and the attached patch from Nacho,
isapi_redirect.dll is able to pass the certificate to
Tomcat. However, when I try it out on Win2k and IIS5.0
I get the following exception displayed:
Ajp13: Certificate convertion failed
java.security.cert.CertificateException:
With the latest source and the attached patch from Nacho,
isapi_redirect.dll is able to pass the certificate to
Tomcat. However, when I try it out on Win2k and IIS5.0
I get the following exception displayed:
Ajp13: Certificate convertion failed
java.security.cert.CertificateException: Unable to
Larry Isaacs wrote:
Hi,
With the latest source and the attached patch from Nacho,
isapi_redirect.dll is able to pass the certificate to
Tomcat. However, when I try it out on Win2k and IIS5.0
I get the following exception displayed:
Ajp13: Certificate convertion failed
My setup is at home, so I'll try this tonight.
Larry
-Original Message-
From: jean-frederic clere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Status of Cert handling in Tomcat 3.3
Larry Isaacs wrote:
Hi
this afternoon and anticipate building RC1
tonight.
Cheers,
Larry
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 1:23 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Larry,
I tried to fix as much as possible
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Larry Isaacs wrote:
3. The spec doesn't address whether a the form-login-page
and form-error-page
should be excluded from the security-constraint, but it
makes sense that
it should. It might be best to postpone this.
+1 to postpone, there is a
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
If you go this way, you would definitely want to make a note someplace
that apps cannot use a security constraint with a /* pattern, because
there is no other directory in which the login and error pages can be
put.
Because /* is a legal URL
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Larry Isaacs wrote:
Hi Costin,
See below for my proposal for Item #2. I think this is
the only one remaining that matters for RC1 at this point.
Let me know if you think this will work.
I think we can postpone this for RC2. You are right -
syncronization in init()
() and before
realSession.setAttribute(), the second request's value would be overwritten
without an valueUnbound() being called.
Done ( well, I hope - I tried to avoid sync() on the 'typical' case ).
2. Evaluate Tomcat 3.3's vulnerability to Double Checked Locking. This
is referred to in Bug #177. See
:
mod_jk.c[R1.9],jk_ajp13_worker.c[R1.8].
You'll have to hunt down Mike Anderson for the details. I just remember the
commits.
- Original Message -
From: Larry Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 1:06 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
],jk_ajp13_worker.c[R1.8].
You'll have to hunt down Mike Anderson for the details. I
just remember the
commits.
- Original Message -
From: Larry Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 1:06 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Thanks. Do
config)
I ask bugs reported to make another test with up to date TC 3.3
11. Make sure we are okay with mod_jk not supporting
Apache's rewrite
in Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk. I'm fine with not supporting it,
but I want
to include some justification in the documentation to avoid some of
the why don't
Then we need to be sure to encode r-uri in the main branch
and to change r-unparsed_uri to encode(r-uri) in the 3.2
branch. I am swamped now and will put it on a long todo
list.. if anyone beats me to it.
And don't forget to port to j-t-c which is still using
for Apache 1.3/2.0 :::
/*
not supporting Apache's rewrite
in Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk. I'm fine with not supporting it, but I want
to include some justification in the documentation to avoid some of
the why don't you questions.
As said Costin, making mod_jk using uri or unparsed_uri is not
difficult, but we have here 2 situations
I interpreted #111 to be the graceful restart clean-up problem that was
fixed some months ago.
- Original Message -
From: GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
7. Evaluate whether
-Original Message-
From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
7. Evaluate whether anything should be done to deal with the use of
non-thread-safe DateFormat and related
]
Subject: Re: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
I interpreted #111 to be the graceful restart clean-up
problem that was
fixed some months ago.
- Original Message -
From: GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining
I need CRLF for building on Windows. It appears that some files
were checked in from *nix containing CR's that were not stripped
during the commit. When I checkout or update from Windows, CVS
still adds a CR in front of all LFs. The result is CRCRLF which
Dev Studio wants to fix. I'd
Another problem is to have them bundled correctly in the src
distribution, or we need 2 distributions ( win32 and *nix) or someone
will complaint , if the dist is done in win32 , *nix people
will scream
, if reversed the other :)..
In the Tomcat 3.3 releases .zip files will contain files
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 1:06 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Thanks. Do you know if just 3.3 was affected
or 3.2.x as well? If you can give me a clue as to
what was changed, I can try to determine this.
Larry
-Original Message-
From: Bill
$0.02.
- Original Message -
From: Larry Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:57 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
-Original Message-
From: GOMEZ Henri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3
DateTool, where the hit would be minimal. Just me $0.02.
+1
Costin
- Original Message -
From: Larry Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:57 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
-Original Message-
From: GOMEZ Henri
to see your contributions. ( and my
appologies for not testing with 1.1 often enough ).
jakarta-tomcat-3.3-dev-src\src\share\org\apache\tomcat\util\depend\DependClassLoader.java
==
The method loadClassInternal
on the stability of Tomcat 3.3. I think most of the bugs
are already fixed, but I need someone more familiar with the
code to make a more informed assessment about the appropriate
resolution.
I am going ahead and posting this even though I haven't spent much
time trying to identify which of these I
-tomcat-service (?? Or wherever appropriate) and I will build a
binary for the 3.3rc1 release.
Dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 12 September 2001 16:31
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Hi All,
I have made
, September 12, 2001 11:54 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
4. Address user authentication via Ajp12 and Ajp13. Ajp12
has a test for
isTomcatAuthentication() to see if req.setRemoteUser() should
be called.
I think Ajp13 doesn't have this yet
Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 12 September 2001 16:31
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Hi All,
I have made a pass through all Tomcat3 bugs. Those listed below
are the only ones that remain open as of last night. Listed for
RC1 and RC2 are issues I
with your
assessment.
Larry
-Original Message-
From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:54 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
4. Address user authentication via Ajp12 and Ajp13. Ajp12
has a test
Subject: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Hi All,
I have made a pass through all Tomcat3 bugs. Those listed below
are the only ones that remain open as of last night. Listed for
RC1 and RC2 are issues I have accumulated as well as bugs that must
be resolved.
Each of these issues needs
I'll take a look. Since jk_nt_service isn't really involved in
the stability of the Tomcat 3.3 server. I think this patch
could appear in RC2 as well. Avaiable sooner as a nightly.
I'll try to address it for RC1, though.
Larry
-Original Message-
From: David Oxley [mailto:[EMAIL
: Re: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
As I expected (having spent enough time on encoded URLs), I
can't reproduce
1483 against B2. It always finds the correct session both in
stand-alone
and Ajp13.
That's true of mod_jk in j-t-c. At least through B2 the mod_jk that ships
with 3.3 uses r-uri.
- Original Message -
From: Keith Wannamaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:11 PM
Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
mod_jk uses (used
On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 03:19:15PM -0400, Larry Isaacs wrote:
One of the main aspects of this issue is for me to
become informed as to the state of Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk
with respect to this. Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk.c has:
s-req_uri = r-uri;
which, by the statement below, appears
| -Original Message-
| From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:19 PM
| To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
| Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
|
|
| One of the main aspects of this issue is for me to
| become informed as to the state of Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Larry Isaacs wrote:
One of the main aspects of this issue is for me to
become informed as to the state of Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk
with respect to this. Tomcat 3.3's mod_jk.c has:
s-req_uri = r-uri;
which, by the statement below, appears to be rewrite
enabled
]]
| Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 6:10 PM
| To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
| Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
|
|
|
| My current 'preference' is to use r-uri, as in the main branch ( and how
| it used to be ). That keeps rewrite working and is consistent with most
| apache modules.
PM
| To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
| Subject: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
|
|
|
| My current 'preference' is to use r-uri, as in the main branch ( and how
| it used to be ). That keeps rewrite working and is consistent with most
| apache modules.
]
Asunto: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Keith Wannamaker wrote:
Then we need to be sure to encode r-uri in the main branch
and to change r-unparsed_uri to encode(r-uri) in the 3.2
branch. I am swamped now and will put it on a long todo
list.. if anyone beats me
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ignacio J. Ortega wrote:
Please give me some info..
It's possible to use no cookies sessions without using mod_rewrite in
apache?
I don't know what you mean - mod_jk is taking care of decuding the
sessionId, and it support both cookie and URL decoding.
I didn't even
?
Saludos ,
Ignacio J. Ortega
-Mensaje original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Enviado el: jueves 13 de septiembre de 2001 1:16
Para: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Asunto: RE: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Ignacio J. Ortega wrote:
Please give me some info
Shouldn't 461 be re-classified as a 4.0 issue?
ServletRequest.setCharacterEncoding is a new feature of 2.3.
- Original Message -
From: Larry Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:31 AM
Subject: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Hi All,
I have
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Bill Barker wrote:
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 17:04:42 -0700
From: Bill Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Bill Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Remaining Tomcat 3.3 Issues
Shouldn't 461 be re-classified as a 4.0 issue
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Christopher Cain wrote:
I don't know what 'long enough' means, my impression is that we had
a
far too long release cycle for 3.3 already.
Don't worry Costin, he doesn't really know what it means either :)
Well, giving the bug
:30
Subject: Re: DIGEST authentication scheme for Tomcat 3.3
Hi Attila,
I'll review your changes and I see no problem with fixing
AccessInterceptor and RealmBase. I'm not sure about the new modules - I
think this is a new feature and I'm not very comfortable with features.
If you don't mind
connection pool stuff we were using sucks and does not recover from
network glitches and database restarts - moving to commons-dbcp now!).
OTOH:
- With Tomcat 3.2.x we had it freezing for no clear reason;
- With JServ we had connector related problems.
From JServ, Tomcat 3.2.x and Tomcat 3.3, 3.3
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[ ] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[X] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[ ] -1I am opposed to this plan, and my reason(s
+1
JTC is the best place for this since it can be kept up to date
with an appropriate version of APR and Apache 2.0.
Mike Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/07/01 12:44PM
I agree with Costin's suggestion to remove the Apache 2.0
version of mod_jk from jakarta-tomcat for Tomcat 3.3.
This would
Hi All,
I propose to update the RELEASE-PLAN-3.3 with the schedule shown
below to finish the release of Jakarta Tomcat 3.3.
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[ ] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[X] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[ ] -1I am opposed to this plan, and my reason(s
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[X] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[ ] -1I am opposed to this plan, and my reason(s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/10/01 08:51AM
Hi All,
I propose to update the RELEASE-PLAN-3.3 with the schedule shown
below to finish the release of Jakarta Tomcat 3.3.
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[X] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[X] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[ ] -1I am opposed to this plan, and my reason(s
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[X] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[ ] -1I am opposed to this plan, and my reason(s
Larry Isaacs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[ ] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[ ] -1I am opposed to this plan, and my reason(s
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
++1! I didn't even know it existed anyplace other than JTC. I have
been supplying patches recently for it too. Also, having duplicate
code anyplace is just a bad idea. I am on a crusade to remove all
duplicate code from every code-base throughout the
on 9/10/01 9:12 AM, Christopher Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[ ] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[X] -1I am opposed
Jon Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 9/10/01 9:12 AM, Christopher Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[ ] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ryan to became more than just a contributer :
This is the third time we agree on something in less than 24 hours. This
implies that either I'm getting old, or just plain silly...
Now, if you could agree
on 9/10/01 1:14 PM, Pier Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be fair, I see only 12 bugs with Tomcat 3.x, and ONLY ONE on 3.3
I'm also worried about regression testing.
, whereas
there are 26 on Tomcat 4.0 currently open, and you didn't vote -1 on 4.0's
release plan... I'm not trying to
on 9/10/01 1:14 PM, Pier Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be fair, I see only 12 bugs with Tomcat 3.x, and ONLY ONE on 3.3
I'm also worried about regression testing.
, whereas
there are 26 on Tomcat 4.0 currently open, and you didn't vote -1 on
4.0's
release plan... I'm not
Even if this is a majority vote, and so far we seem to have the votes we
need for the release, I think Jon is right on not releasing unless all
the bugs are evaluated and we fix all the bugs that we think are important
and don't destabilize the release.
For 3.3 there is only one reopened bug (
on 9/10/01 1:44 PM, Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll read that as:
There shouldn't be any confirmed bugs above at major or higher severity
open in the bug database. Otherwise, I disagree with your statement.
We can still release if there are some, but that will need a vote on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ryan to became more than just a contributer :
This is the third time we agree on something in less than 24 hours. This
implies that either I'm getting old, or
Jon Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 9/10/01 1:14 PM, Pier Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be fair, I see only 12 bugs with Tomcat 3.x, and ONLY ONE on 3.3
I'm also worried about regression testing.
Well, let them do their fucking job... If we gave them committer access, it
means
on 9/10/01 2:13 PM, Pier Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, let them do their fucking job... If we gave them committer access, it
means that we trust them. If they say that 3.3 is ready to go, well, I'm not
going to stop them because FIRST I never contributed a line of code, SECOND
I
On Monday 10 September 2001 14:05, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ryan to became more than just a contributer :
This is the third time we agree on something in less
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, thank you Pier !
I believe I'm just being fair... We have our disagreements on most of the
technical aspects of the code, that's why, to my disappointment too, we have
TWO releases coming out in parallel, but, as I said last week to Henri, the
3.3 (final release)
on 9/10/01 9:12 AM, Christopher Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
= Tomcat 3.3 Final Release Plan Ballot =
[ ] +1I am in favor of this plan, and will help
[ ] +0I am in favor of this plan, but am unable to help
[ ] -0I not in favor of this plan
[X
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
This is the third time we agree on something in less than 24 hours. This
implies that either I'm getting old, or just plain silly...
Now, if you could agree on merging mod_webapp and mod_jk, that would be
something...
Slowww down... :)
Jon Stevens wrote:
[snip]
If T4.0 FINAL has bugs not in VERIFIED/CLOSED state, then I'm going
to vote -1 on its release.
FWIW, I agree with that sentiment; but to the best of my knowledge, so
does everyone else. Given that, I really don't anticipate a problem
here. AFAIK, everyone is in
On Monday 10 September 2001 14:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
This is the third time we agree on something in less than 24 hours.
This implies that either I'm getting old, or just plain silly...
Now, if you could agree on merging mod_webapp
William Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keeping up with 4.0 isn't a good enough reason, since I'm sure that
there are plenty of people like me who can't even think of moving to 4.0
until it has release-quality connectors.
I know... Working on it as fast as I can to fix bugs, and thank god
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 10 September 2001 14:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mod_jk will use APR - that's certain. The only question is when and how
to do the transition without affecting the stability of the code. Having
an APR1.0 out is one of the requirements - I don't
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
I'm actually right now working on the thread locks for Windows, and then I
am going to start agitating for an APR release. We should have APR 1.0 out
the door soon-ish. I am hoping to have it released sometime in the next month
or two. :-)
That's
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
Mod_jk will use APR - that's certain. The only question is when and how
to do the transition without affecting the stability of the code. Having
an APR1.0 out is one of the requirements - I don't think we can release
mod_jk, even from j-t-c,
On Monday 10 September 2001 15:22, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MMAP is the other scary stuff in APR, the new code (without Ralph's
libmm) it no more than one month old... I need it for load balancing,
but I want to double check with the guys in CA next week
Okay, okay ... let's not start getting goofy here. As I don't remember
Larry every insinuating that his decision to release was simply to keep
up with 4.0, let's leave the rather insulting and uninformed
speculation at home, shall we?
Knowing Larry, I'm not inclined to think that his decision
101 - 200 of 370 matches
Mail list logo
