Re: Followup2: Changed behaviour of Tomcat Deployment/Context/Lifecycle Manager concerning symbolic links
On 10/03/2019 20:54, Michael Osipov wrote: > Am 2019-03-10 um 12:16 schrieb Mark Thomas: >> On 10/03/2019 09:08, Guido Jäkel wrote: >>> Dear John, Hi Rainer, >>> >>> Thank you for your hints. I leaned to used this features on Github >>> locate the commit - it's >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/fd2abbb525660a9968694afd99a58f8c22cb54c6 >>> >>> >>> and it was committed by Mark Thomas. I don't know about the Tomcat >>> project policies, but IMHO in the commit comment there was not any >>> real hit for the motivation for the change or any reference to an >>> issue ticket or a pull request. There's just one sentence for the >>> changelog: >>> >>> Ensure that a canonical path is always used for the docBase >>> of a Context >>> to ensure consistent behaviour. (markt) >>> >>> But I can't get any idea from that what the author (Mark?) want to >>> say with the terms "ensure" and "consistent". And it's classified as >>> a "fix", but up to now I was not able to find the use case that is >>> said to be fixed with this. >>> >>> From my point of view, the change lead to something what might be >>> termed with "inconsistent", because now the link name is used as >>> docBase, but the link destination is used to decide concrete aspects >>> of Context loading. >>> >>> >>> >>> @Rainer: I familiarize me with the blame/history feature and have >>> located the commit with this. But now, please tell me how to object >>> against this change? Should I prepare a Git pull request against the >>> master repository? Should I open an Issue somewhere? And how to >>> locate the discussion that lead to this change? This should be tied >>> to prevent flapping and respect and arrange with the motivation there. >> >> Changes aren't made on a whim. It is recommended that you investigate >> why a change was made before objecting to it. >> >> When a commit message in isolation appears to be missing context then >> that context can normally be found on the dev@ list. The 24 hours of >> dev@ traffic leading up to this commit should provide all the necessary >> background. > > There aren't any. I see the commit mail in Thunderbird, but no > discussion on the change: > > Message-Id: <20181003111609.0b0143a0...@svn01-us-west.apache.org> > > So, what now? The context is there on the dev@ list in the 24 hours leading up to that commit. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Followup2: Changed behaviour of Tomcat Deployment/Context/Lifecycle Manager concerning symbolic links
Am 2019-03-10 um 12:16 schrieb Mark Thomas: On 10/03/2019 09:08, Guido Jäkel wrote: Dear John, Hi Rainer, Thank you for your hints. I leaned to used this features on Github locate the commit - it's https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/fd2abbb525660a9968694afd99a58f8c22cb54c6 and it was committed by Mark Thomas. I don't know about the Tomcat project policies, but IMHO in the commit comment there was not any real hit for the motivation for the change or any reference to an issue ticket or a pull request. There's just one sentence for the changelog: Ensure that a canonical path is always used for the docBase of a Context to ensure consistent behaviour. (markt) But I can't get any idea from that what the author (Mark?) want to say with the terms "ensure" and "consistent". And it's classified as a "fix", but up to now I was not able to find the use case that is said to be fixed with this. From my point of view, the change lead to something what might be termed with "inconsistent", because now the link name is used as docBase, but the link destination is used to decide concrete aspects of Context loading. @Rainer: I familiarize me with the blame/history feature and have located the commit with this. But now, please tell me how to object against this change? Should I prepare a Git pull request against the master repository? Should I open an Issue somewhere? And how to locate the discussion that lead to this change? This should be tied to prevent flapping and respect and arrange with the motivation there. Changes aren't made on a whim. It is recommended that you investigate why a change was made before objecting to it. When a commit message in isolation appears to be missing context then that context can normally be found on the dev@ list. The 24 hours of dev@ traffic leading up to this commit should provide all the necessary background. There aren't any. I see the commit mail in Thunderbird, but no discussion on the change: Message-Id: <20181003111609.0b0143a0...@svn01-us-west.apache.org> So, what now? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Followup2: Changed behaviour of Tomcat Deployment/Context/Lifecycle Manager concerning symbolic links
Dear John, Hi Rainer,
Thank you for your hints. I leaned to used this features on Github locate the
commit - it's
https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/fd2abbb525660a9968694afd99a58f8c22cb54c6
and it was committed by Mark Thomas. I don't know about the Tomcat project
policies, but IMHO in the commit comment there was not any real hit for the
motivation for the change or any reference to an issue ticket or a pull
request. There's just one sentence for the changelog:
Ensure that a canonical path is always used for the docBase of a Context
to ensure consistent behaviour. (markt)
But I can't get any idea from that what the author (Mark?) want to say with the
terms "ensure" and "consistent". And it's classified as a "fix", but up to now
I was not able to find the use case that is said to be fixed with this.
>From my point of view, the change lead to something what might be termed with
>"inconsistent", because now the link name is used as docBase, but the link
>destination is used to decide concrete aspects of Context loading.
@Rainer: I familiarize me with the blame/history feature and have located the
commit with this. But now, please tell me how to object against this change?
Should I prepare a Git pull request against the master repository? Should I
open an Issue somewhere? And how to locate the discussion that lead to this
change? This should be tied to prevent flapping and respect and arrange with
the motivation there.
@John: And thank *you* for your curiosity, I just wand to satisfy this but not
self-adulate with the explanation:
As mentioned, I'm not working as a Developer but as an Unix operations system
architect. I have worked out my first programs on TRS80 and PET and from this I
have a wide background what I would code if to have to write something to
implement a task. And because I work at the operating, it's a big part of my
daily work to "reverse engineer" the issues "stashed" by my coworkers at the
dev department from the symptoms in an -- in the eyes of a typical developer --
unusual way.
I'm also the builder of my own architecture and i use Gentoo Linux for this.
Here, Tomcat is build from the sources and in addition, Gentoo offers the
(unique?) feature to free choose a concrete version of the upstream sources and
(if the ebuilds are prepared for) even to install versions in parallel. This is
not the case for Tomcat, but one may nevertheless enroll different sources for
building and compiling in parallel.
>From the behaviour and stack trace, I got the package names and the area of
>the code tree. I start to read the source code and did some 'grep -r foo *'
>and 'diff -r tomcat-5.8.{23,37}/' on the code tree. I intentional focused on
>small changes first and after some minutes I found the "perfect match": A
>single line changed from getPath() to getCanicalPath(). After a quick look on
>the surrounding code (using vi) on an abstract level (i.e. used naming,
>visible intention of the code) I was sure to bet on this. Then I revert the
>change, let the whole compile, package an install and prove it by an
>rollout-out the problematic target environment (one of my LX-Containers). And
>as expected, the issue vanished and all installed application deploy in the
>same way as before.
greetings
Guido
On 09.03.19 15:02, John Dale wrote:
> Nice investigative work, Guido.
>
> Curious, are you debugging the source code? Downloading any nightly builds?
>
> If you're connected to the repo somehow you could get users named on
> the commit logs and read commit messages?
>
> Again - nice work!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> John
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Followup2: Changed behaviour of Tomcat Deployment/Context/Lifecycle Manager concerning symbolic links
On 10/03/2019 09:08, Guido Jäkel wrote: > Dear John, Hi Rainer, > > Thank you for your hints. I leaned to used this features on Github locate the > commit - it's > > > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/commit/fd2abbb525660a9968694afd99a58f8c22cb54c6 > > and it was committed by Mark Thomas. I don't know about the Tomcat project > policies, but IMHO in the commit comment there was not any real hit for the > motivation for the change or any reference to an issue ticket or a pull > request. There's just one sentence for the changelog: > > Ensure that a canonical path is always used for the docBase of a > Context > to ensure consistent behaviour. (markt) > > But I can't get any idea from that what the author (Mark?) want to say with > the terms "ensure" and "consistent". And it's classified as a "fix", but up > to now I was not able to find the use case that is said to be fixed with this. > > From my point of view, the change lead to something what might be termed with > "inconsistent", because now the link name is used as docBase, but the link > destination is used to decide concrete aspects of Context loading. > > > > @Rainer: I familiarize me with the blame/history feature and have located the > commit with this. But now, please tell me how to object against this change? > Should I prepare a Git pull request against the master repository? Should I > open an Issue somewhere? And how to locate the discussion that lead to this > change? This should be tied to prevent flapping and respect and arrange with > the motivation there. Changes aren't made on a whim. It is recommended that you investigate why a change was made before objecting to it. When a commit message in isolation appears to be missing context then that context can normally be found on the dev@ list. The 24 hours of dev@ traffic leading up to this commit should provide all the necessary background. Archives for dev@ are listed here: http://tomcat.apache.org/lists.html#tomcat-dev Personally, I favour MarkMail's UI but that is very much a personal choice. All the archives have the same messages. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
