On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: > > There is no problem if we use 2 Http11Protocol, one with ThreadPool the > > other with 4.0 threads. Right now I'm working on the TP one. > > We don't need two, so I'll try yours ;-) > Do you plan to write the Http11ProtocolHandler ?
Already done, but I have a bug I'm trying to fix ( the classical body sent before headers or mixed up, I've seen this at least 10 times :-). I'll check it in, it doesn't affect anything else ( it's not pretty yet, I moved code from few places ). Now the big question - can you take a look at util.handler.TcHandler ? I'm don't want to replace ActionHook ( for now :-), but maybe have Action extend TcHandler - or something similar, so the hook can use the ctx ( and pass and return information ). I can also use TcHandlerContext ( i.e. just a set of int-indexed notes ) as param for Action hook as the first step. Long term I think we should use TcHandler as the main hook and deprecate ActionHook/JkHandler/etc. Of course, the name and interface is open to change - we can rename it TcHook and make it interface, or use action() and pass an object similar with ActionCode ( maybe ActionChain - since each ActionCode represents a specific category of hooks chained ) Just review it - pluging it in can be done later ( and smoothly ) Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
