Mark Thomas wrote On 11/30/05 13:42,:
> Jan,
>
> This looks good to me.
>
> I have patches ready to go for TC4 and TC5. They are based on the
> existing code but implement the spirit of Bill's proposed solution and
> add handling for crossContext.
>
> I'll give people a little longer in case
Jan,
This looks good to me.
I have patches ready to go for TC4 and TC5. They are based on the
existing code but implement the spirit of Bill's proposed solution and
add handling for crossContext.
I'll give people a little longer in case they want to add to this
discussion and then I'll comm
Mark,
Mark Thomas wrote On 11/29/05 12:46,:
> Jan,
>
> Jan Luehe wrote:
>
>>Hi Mark,
>
>
>
>>I agree the current javadocs of ServletContext.getContext() are
>>ambiguous, and I agree we need to present this case to the
>>Servlet EG. Maybe there is a small chance to have this resolved
>>in the
Jan,
Jan Luehe wrote:
Hi Mark,
I agree the current javadocs of ServletContext.getContext() are
ambiguous, and I agree we need to present this case to the
Servlet EG. Maybe there is a small chance to have this resolved
in the Servlet 2.5 timeframe ...
I think it would be more useful to have t
Hi Mark,
Mark Thomas wrote On 11/24/05 11:34,:
> All,
>
> I have been looking at bug 13040 and reviewing the current
> getContext() implementation. I saw Remy's comment from some time ago
> when fixing some related bugs
> (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-dev&m=106008981803343&w=2)
> t
At 18:20 27/11/2005 +, you wrote:
Bill Barker wrote:
I can't really dispute the interpretation of
the spec, but the change is likely to break many more webapps then it fixes :(.
I thought this too. However, I think we should
implement the spec as is. If we start relaxing
it here, then wh
Mark Thomas wrote:
Bill Barker wrote:
I can't really dispute the interpretation of the spec, but the change
is likely to break many more webapps then it fixes :(.
I thought this too. However, I think we should implement the spec as is.
If we start relaxing it here, then where else do we rel
Mark Thomas wrote:
The complications I referred to in the SSI commit are:
1. The definition of uripath says it is a context path which for the
root context would be "". In the method description it says uripath
must always start with "/". This is not consistent.
2. The definition of uripath
Bill Barker wrote:
I can't really dispute the interpretation of the spec, but the change is
likely to break many more webapps then it fixes :(.
I thought this too. However, I think we should implement the spec as
is. If we start relaxing it here, then where else do we relax it? If
other Servl
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 11:34 AM
Subject: getContext() - spec interpretation
All,
I have been looking at bug 13040 and reviewing the current getContext()
implementation. I saw Remy's c
Oddly enough, I was thinking about the same thing a couple of weeks
ago and tend to agree with your interpretation...
Yoav
On 11/24/05, Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>
> I have been looking at bug 13040 and reviewing the current
> getContext() implementation. I saw Remy's comment
All,
I have been looking at bug 13040 and reviewing the current
getContext() implementation. I saw Remy's comment from some time ago
when fixing some related bugs
(http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-dev&m=106008981803343&w=2)
that this would be better if the spec mandated that the paramet
12 matches
Mail list logo
