Bill Barker wrote:
I suppose that Coyote can be optional for TC 3.3. I'm a bit less
comfortable on using them in o.a.t.u (since that would force a Java2
requirement on 3.3).
Stuff I'm considering for removal:
- o.a.t.util.collections (except MultiMap - which might as well be
merged into
As long as they go back to j-t (esp. Expirer Reaper), I'm +1.
- Original Message -
From: Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 5:14 AM
Subject: Re: Converting Coyote to Java2 collections
Bill Barker wrote:
I
Bill Barker wrote:
As long as they go back to j-t (esp. Expirer Reaper), I'm +1.
I can leave those two classes, no problem. It's not as if they were
really big.
Rémy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional
no complaints here :)
just be careful of those ConcurrentModificationException(s) that are lurking
in the iterators :-)
Filip
-Original Message-
From: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 11:54 AM
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: Converting Coyote
I suppose that Coyote can be optional for TC 3.3. I'm a bit less
comfortable on using them in o.a.t.u (since that would force a Java2
requirement on 3.3).
- Original Message -
From: Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 02,
Bill Barker wrote:
I suppose that Coyote can be optional for TC 3.3. I'm a bit less
comfortable on using them in o.a.t.u (since that would force a Java2
requirement on 3.3).
The thing which was annoying me the most was the attributes Hashtable in
the request.
I think util is using mostly custom
: Converting Coyote to Java2 collections
Bill Barker wrote:
I suppose that Coyote can be optional for TC 3.3. I'm a bit less
comfortable on using them in o.a.t.u (since that would force a Java2
requirement on 3.3).
The thing which was annoying me the most was the attributes Hashtable in
the request.
I
