gt; >Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:26 PM
> >To: Tomcat Users List
> >Subject: RE: What Connector Should I Use?
> >
> >This note here says:
> >
> >IMPORTANT NOTE: The JK connector is now deprecated. Use the Coyote JK 2
> >connector instead.
> >
&
nal Message-
>From: Thomas Charles Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 5:26 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: RE: What Connector Should I Use?
>
>This note here says:
>
>IMPORTANT NOTE: The JK connector is now deprecated. Use the Coyote JK 2
&
to be back ported
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Charles Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 29 November 2004 16:00
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: What Connector Should I Use?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to determine the correct connecto
And when (roughly) is Apache 2.1 due?
Michal.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 6:14 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: What Connector Should I Use?
>
> Phillip Qin wrote:
> > Will
Allistair Crossley wrote:
hope this is not a thread hijack ..
in terms of IIS, will the isapi_redirect.dll be recommended for use rather than
the JK2 isapi_redirector2.dll?
Yes.
I'm planning even to make a InstallShiled installer for
isapi_redirector, so that users don't need to set all that
by ha
David Boyer wrote:
I really like (and depend upon) the regular expression URI matching
capabilities of JK2 and that has driven my decision to use JK2. I
believe the regexp matching is being back-ported into JK, and once that
happens I think I will probably go that route and drop JK2.
Right now I
Phillip Qin wrote:
Will you suggest that we can now start switching jk2 to either mod_proxy or
mod_jk? I really hate jk because it is difficult to configure (am I the
first one to say that?) compared to jk2. I am kinda guy that would like to
deal with the enemy I know, in this case - jk2.
Well yes,
jk2.
-Original Message-
From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 29, 2004 11:39 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: What Connector Should I Use?
Phillip Qin wrote:
> I think the "other reason" cited in the news does not apply to me. I
> use jk2. I like
#x27;Tomcat Users List'
> Subject: RE: What Connector Should I Use?
>
>
> Will you suggest that we can now start switching jk2 to
> either mod_proxy or
> mod_jk? I really hate jk because it is difficult to configure
> (am I the
> first one to say that?) compared to jk
-
From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 29, 2004 11:39 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: What Connector Should I Use?
Phillip Qin wrote:
> I think the "other reason" cited in the news does not apply to me. I
> use jk2. I like it because it is easy to con
Phillip Qin wrote:
I think the "other reason" cited in the news does not apply to me. I use
jk2. I like it because it is easy to configure.
You are the first one saying that :).
Of course, if people already
have the jk configure in production, why would they bother upgrading to jk2
and creating a
still use Apache
1.3.
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Charles Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 29, 2004 11:00 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: What Connector Should I Use?
Hi,
I'm trying to determine the correct connector to use these days. I've seen
co
Connector Should I Use?
Hi,
I'm trying to determine the correct connector to use these days. I've
seen conflicting content on jakarta.apache.org:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/jk2/index.html
15 November 2004 - JK2 is officially unsupported!
(http://jakarta.apache.
Hi,
I'm trying to determine the correct connector to use these days. I've
seen conflicting content on jakarta.apache.org:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/jk2/index.html
15 November 2004 - JK2 is officially unsupported!
(http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/jk2/news/200
14 matches
Mail list logo
