Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-03 Thread Henri Gomez
Costin Manolache wrote: Henri Gomez wrote: More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. Do you have a multithreaded apache1.3 ? It's very important to compile it as

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-03 Thread jean-frederic clere
Henri Gomez wrote: Costin Manolache wrote: Henri Gomez wrote: More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. Do you have a multithreaded apache1.3 ? It's very

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread Henri Gomez
#ifdef AS400 fp = fopen(workerFile, w, o_ccsid=0); #else fp = fopen(workerFile, w); #endif Is this abstractive code enough ;) That was the initial price to have iSeries support in JK2. But that's rigth, I'll create a jk_os.c to hide this from main code (in both jk

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread Henri Gomez
More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. JNI support in JK2 requires APR. So I build an apr 0.9.1 rpm, which include apr-utils since apr-utils couldn't be built without apr

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread Mladen Turk
-Original Message- From: Henri Gomez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 8:36 AM To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1 #ifdef AS400 fp = fopen(workerFile, w, o_ccsid=0); #else fp = fopen(workerFile, w); #endif

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread Mladen Turk
-Original Message- From: Henri Gomez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 8:48 AM To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1 More comments on APR and JK2. Ok, I stopped here since I feel there is many works to conduct in JK2 to make

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread jean-frederic clere
Henri Gomez wrote: More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. JNI support in JK2 requires APR. So I build an apr 0.9.1 rpm, which include apr-utils since apr-utils

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread Henri Gomez
jean-frederic clere wrote: Henri Gomez wrote: More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. JNI support in JK2 requires APR. So I build an apr 0.9.1 rpm, which include

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread jean-frederic clere
Henri Gomez wrote: jean-frederic clere wrote: Henri Gomez wrote: More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. JNI support in JK2 requires APR. So I build an apr

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-02 Thread Costin Manolache
Henri Gomez wrote: More comments on APR and JK2. While making tomcat-connectors rpm for jk2, and also jk2 binaries for Linux, I wanted to have apache 1.3 jk2 built with JNI support. Do you have a multithreaded apache1.3 ? It's very important to compile it as multithreaded and link pthread

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread jean-frederic clere
General: [+0] Drop HAS_APR flags and dissalow building of JK2 without APR [ ] Keep everything like it is (the rest doesn't interests me) Regular expressions: [ ] Add pcre from httpd-2.0 to the common/pcre [ ] Add pcre from httpd-2.0 to the srclib/pcre [+1] Wait if pcre ever comes to the

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Henri Gomez
Even if I agree with using APR in JK 2.1, I think we should first focus on having a stable JK 2.0 before starting thinking about JK 2.1. Branching now since premature. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Mladen Turk
-Original Message- From: Henri Gomez Even if I agree with using APR in JK 2.1, I think we should first focus on having a stable JK 2.0 before starting thinking about JK 2.1. That's good one :). I agree with that, but would like to make the load balancer to have a timeout

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Henri Gomez
Mladen Turk wrote: -Original Message- From: Henri Gomez Even if I agree with using APR in JK 2.1, I think we should first focus on having a stable JK 2.0 before starting thinking about JK 2.1. That's good one :). As I said it's premature to discuss what should be in JK 2.1

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Ignacio J. Ortega
De: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: 1 de octubre de 2002 9:16 Althought i agree with the overall goals for a 2.1 release ( i should say they are nor very ambitious for point release), i agree with Henri too in the comments he mades, is a bit premature to open a 2.1 relase,

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Mladen Turk
-Original Message- From: Ignacio J. Ortega And i agree with Henri also ( and i dont understand your writing it twice argument ) that to open a Branch right now, is another development nightmare.. Well, didn't think that it would require a new branch. Ok, can we at least agree

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Henri Gomez
Well, didn't think that it would require a new branch. Ok, can we at least agree to the following. 1. Apache2 uses APR 2. IIS uses APR 3. Apache1 can use the APR. Did iPlanet/NES could use APR on Netware, I'm waiting for Mike Anderson advices. Also we should be very carefull with APR

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Mladen Turk
-Original Message- From: Henri Gomez We speaked about use of APR in JK2 many times in the past, take a look at tomcat-dev mailing list archive. Know that, but often people change opinions, you cannot blame to occasionally put that back on ;) Making APR mandatory for JK2

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Costin Manolache
IMO: one of the main goals of jk2 was modularity, i.e. jk2 is composed of components, each component can use and do whatever it likes without affecting the other components. I totally agree that jk2.1 should use APR ( I'll send my vote on each point ) - but I don't think the old code should be

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Costin Manolache
Mladen Turk wrote: We speaked about use of APR in JK2 many times in the past, take a look at tomcat-dev mailing list archive. Know that, but often people change opinions, you cannot blame to occasionally put that back on ;) That's right. I totally agree that all new code and features

RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Mladen Turk
know how to write the code for such a component. -Original Message- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Costin Manolache Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [VOTE] JK2 2.1 MT. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [VOTE] JK2 2.1

2002-10-01 Thread Costin Manolache
Mladen Turk wrote: Hi, Since there has been general concensus that we should use the APR for every supported API call. Here is my design proposal. General: [ ] Drop HAS_APR flags and dissalow building of JK2 without APR [ ] Keep everything like it is (the rest doesn't interests me)