On 29/12/11 15:50, Bill Barker wrote:
Thanks for looking at the two errors for me, Bill. It was hard to see
your comments because the formatting of your reply appeared mangled when
I received it. I have snipped out everything except the important bits
below...
"Brian Burch" wrote in mes
"Brian Burch" wrote in message news:4efbea99.1020...@pingtoo.com...
On 28/12/11 14:40, Bill Barker wrote:
To whom it may engage...
This caught my attention, but I am puzzled (see details below).
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit ht
On 28/12/11 14:40, Bill Barker wrote:
To whom it may engage...
This caught my attention, but I am puzzled (see details below).
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gum
> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org]
> Subject: Improving wiki security
> Given we see almost as many spam changes as valid ones, is it
> time for this:
> http://wiki.apache.org/general/OurWikiFarm#per_wiki_access_control_-
> _tighten_your_wiki_just_a_little.2C_benefit_just_a_lot
That
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project tomcat-trunk-validate has an issue affecting its community integration.
Th
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project tomcat-tc7.0.x-validate has an issue affecting its community
integration.
On 28/12/11 23:18, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 28/12/2011 10:49, Brian Burch wrote:
So... can I submit a patch for these three changes to build.xml? I am
sure this will make some of you nervous, but it seems the cleanest
approach to me.
I have no issues with "tweaking" build.xml if it makes integrat
On 29/12/11 02:30, Mark Thomas wrote:
Given we see almost as many spam changes as valid ones, is it time for this:
http://wiki.apache.org/general/OurWikiFarm#per_wiki_access_control_-_tighten_your_wiki_just_a_little.2C_benefit_just_a_lot
I already expected to ask for permission before making a
You may have read about a recently announced vulnerability rooted in the
Java hashtable implementation [1]. Since Apache Tomcat uses a hashtable
for storing HTTP request parameters, it is affected by this issue.
As per [1], it appears that Oracle will not be providing a fix for this
vulnerability
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
Author: markt
Date: Wed Dec 28 21:29:00 2011
New Revision: 1225345
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225345&view=rev
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Improve response length logging when sendfile is being used
Modified:
tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/ (props chan
Author: markt
Date: Wed Dec 28 21:21:31 2011
New Revision: 1225343
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225343&view=rev
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52316
Improve response length logging when sendfile is being used
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catali
Author: markt
Date: Wed Dec 28 20:40:39 2011
New Revision: 1225327
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225327&view=rev
Log:
Resolve Eclipse warnings in o.a.tomcat.net package
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioChannel.java
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util
Author: markt
Date: Wed Dec 28 16:26:46 2011
New Revision: 1225222
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225222&view=rev
Log:
Review by kkolinko.
- Remove FORM auth specific call.
- Javadoc formatting.
- Honour the cache attribute of the authenticator.
Modified:
tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/ (prop
Given we see almost as many spam changes as valid ones, is it time for this:
http://wiki.apache.org/general/OurWikiFarm#per_wiki_access_control_-_tighten_your_wiki_just_a_little.2C_benefit_just_a_lot
Mark
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
On 27/12/2011 21:36, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
> 1. I think the AuthenticatoBase#cache flag should be honored.
Agreed. Fixed.
> 2. Constants.FORM_PRINCIPAL_NOTE is specific to FormAuthenticator.
> Should it be used here?
Removed.
> 3. Javadoc formatting for the method needs some and .
Done.
Author: markt
Date: Wed Dec 28 16:22:16 2011
New Revision: 1225219
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1225219&view=rev
Log:
Review by kkolinko.
- Remove FORM auth specific call.
- Javadoc formatting.
- Honour the cache attribute of the authenticator.
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project tomcat-trunk-validate has an issue affecting its community integration.
Th
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org.
Project tomcat-tc7.0.x-validate has an issue affecting its community
integration.
On 28/12/2011 10:49, Brian Burch wrote:
> So... can I submit a patch for these three changes to build.xml? I am
> sure this will make some of you nervous, but it seems the cleanest
> approach to me.
I have no issues with "tweaking" build.xml if it makes integration
easier with Eclipse, NetBeans, a
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52393
Konstantin Kolinko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
2011/12/28 Brian Burch :
> When I submitted a bug and fix recently, I promised to develop some unit
> tests to demonstrate the behaviour of my change.
>
> I don't want to get into a *#!&ing contest here, but I switched away from
> eclipse a long time ago, when IBM threw in the towel over not having
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52393
Bug #: 52393
Summary: MapELResolver.getType always returns Object.class
instead of the real type
Product: Tomcat 7
Version: 7.0.22
Platform: PC
OS/Version: L
When I submitted a bug and fix recently, I promised to develop some unit
tests to demonstrate the behaviour of my change.
I don't want to get into a *#!&ing contest here, but I switched away
from eclipse a long time ago, when IBM threw in the towel over not
having a pure java workbench. Having
24 matches
Mail list logo
