No problem :-) I didn't realize you were the only one who could do this. I just thought they'd slipped through the cracks.
Thanks, Warwick -----Original Message----- From: Ingo Brunberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 5:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Defect submissions to CVS? Hi Warwick, I'm still aware of your submisions, but I had no time to work on them yet. Please be a little patient. Ingo P.S The most urgent problem is the comparison between esacped and unescaped paths in the UNLOCK method. You see, I' aware of that also. > Hi, > > I was wondering if anyone has looked at the other defect submissions I > made for inclusion in CVS. I've seen 30903 applied to CVS but there > are still 4 others that haven't as yet. They are 30900, 30902, 30904 > and 30907. I marked them as "resolved" in the BugZilla which may not > have been the right thing to do since they haven't been applied to CVS > yet. > > Ingo, after restesting with 2.1 beta as you suggested, there's one > change I made in 30900 for the "space separated existence check" that > has been fixed in the beta release, but there are 3 other changes in > WebdavResource.java in that same defect submission that I think are > still valid. One is an improvement to the way that we determine > whether we need to put a "/" on the end of resource name for > comparison purposes. The second is the addition of a lockMethod() that > takes a depth parameter and the third is an added > discoverOwnLocks() method that takes the owner rather than getting it from > the current resource context. > > Thanks, > Warwick --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
