2012/10/5 Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net>: > Konstantin, > > On 10/5/12 7:33 AM, kkoli...@apache.org wrote: >> Author: kkolinko >> Date: Fri Oct 5 11:33:22 2012 >> New Revision: 1394452 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1394452&view=rev >> Log: >> Followup to r1394343: Update javadoc for hasOp method. >> It seems that is the only place where this method is documented. >> >> Note that Java classes are present in native/branches/1.1.x but do not exist >> in native/trunk. >> >> Modified: >> tomcat/native/branches/1.1.x/java/org/apache/tomcat/jni/SSL.java >> tomcat/native/branches/1.1.x/java/overview.html >> tomcat/native/branches/1.1.x/xdocs/miscellaneous/changelog.xml >> >> Modified: tomcat/native/branches/1.1.x/java/org/apache/tomcat/jni/SSL.java > > Shouldn't that code just be removed entirely? I didn't update the Java > code in the tcnative project because I don't believe it's been kept > up-to-date for a while, has it? >
1. I do not see a reason to remove it from the branch. 2. I just though that behaviour /requirements/expectations of hasOp() must be documented somewhere. The old Javadoc correctly documented that the only flag that it supported was that legacy renegotiation one. If we consider the java classes in tomcat/trunk as the main source of java classes for tcnative, then I think this javadoc update could be applied there as well. Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
