>Yes, you are right, porting JNDIRealm from TC4.0, shouldn't be a
>difficult task.. and is the easy, lazy and right thing :).
>
>In fact i think it's possible to abstract the realm implementation from
>the container details, as the ongoing effort on jasper for example..
>this would be a Good Thing (tm), to have a common realms codebase for
>all Tomcat trees..
+1
Each contribution is fine, and if you could do JNDIRealm port to 3.3
it will be greatly appreciated by all of us.
Thanks
>
>Saludos ,
>Ignacio J. Ortega
>
>
>> -----Mensaje original-----
>> De: Ellen Lockhart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Enviado el: viernes 11 de mayo de 2001 16:04
>> Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Asunto: Re: [PATCH] LDAPRealm implementation
>>
>>
>> I actually ported this one from a 3.2.1 implementation I did,
>> with a few
>> changes. But since there is now a JNDIRealm implementation,
>> wouldn't it be
>> preferred to have a counterpart to that one on the TC 3.3
>> tree (same setup,
>> etc.)?
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "GOMEZ Henri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 6:52 AM
>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] LDAPRealm implementation
>>
>>
>> > I'll thanks you for porting the LDAPRealm implementation
>> > to the TC 3.3 tree !)
>> >
>> > -
>> > Henri Gomez ___[_]____
>> > EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED] (. .)
>> > PGP KEY : 697ECEDD ...oOOo..(_)..oOOo...
>> > PGP Fingerprint : 9DF8 1EA8 ED53 2F39 DC9B 904A 364F 80E6
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > >-----Original Message-----
>> > >From: Ellen Lockhart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> > >Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 3:45 PM
>> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > >Subject: Re: [PATCH] LDAPRealm implementation
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >I apologize if my submission of an LDAPRealm
>> implementation appeared
>> > >presumptuous - at the time that I needed it, all I could find
>> > >were emails
>> > >from other people asking if there was one (upon doing web
>> > >searches.) So
>> > >after writing it and testing it out and getting the
>> > >documentation clear, I
>> > >volunteered it for tomcat, since it was something that a lot
>> > >of other people
>> > >could use too. Apparently some discussion has already
>> gone on about an
>> > >implementation of this, as I found it later when I had some
>> > >more time to
>> > >review the archives, and the tomcat 4 b4 release now has an
>> > >implementation
>> > >:-).
>> > >
>> > >The jakarta website encourages people to get involved; I
>> am a little
>> > >disappointed to not receive at least a "thanks but no thanks"
>> > >response. But
>> > >I am glad that there is now a realm implementation that will
>> > >work with LDAP
>> > >for tomcat.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>>
>
