Bill Barker wrote:
"Filip Hanik - Dev Lists" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Barker wrote:
"Filip Hanik - Dev Lists" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
so if we are not going to build the class, why would we include it in
SVN and document it? It wont be part of the release.
As has been going on in Jakarta-Commons, the release is the source
release. The binary is just gravy:). The Connectors tree already (for a
very long time), has conditional dependancies on the JDK used to compile.
got it. then yes add it in...later :)
once I announced that the tag would be created, a pile of checkins
suddenly happened, and not properly tested.
I'd rather see those checkins for after the tag.
reasonable?
My changes to the AJP Connectors are pretty much harmless for anything that
currently works. Tomcat will do exactly the same thing it always has unless
the request body is over 2GB. Currently, mod_jk can't handle this case
anyway, and the reporter of BZ 42608 claims that mod_proxy_ajp can't either
(but I can't see it myself). However, if you feel strongly about it, it is
always your right to veto the commits :).
we're good, I'll tag later today
Filip
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
