Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

+1 Appart the JSP 2.1, TC 6.0 changes will be in which areas ? >2005/12/21, Tim Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > +0 > > (+1 - if I can realign my day job duties to free up time to help more :( ) > > -Tim > > Remy Maucherat wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Besides adding support for Servlet 2.5 which does not se

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

For Servlet 2.5, the highlights are: Requires 1.5 as minimum Java version. Needs to support Annotations (probably the biggest project). Some minor changes to Sessions to support Portlets. A couple of really minor changes to 'web.xml' parsing. Of course, you can always grab the spec as som

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

2005/12/21, Bill Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > For Servlet 2.5, the highlights are: > Requires 1.5 as minimum Java version. > Needs to support Annotations (probably the biggest project). > Some minor changes to Sessions to support Portlets. > A couple of really minor changes to 'web.xml' p

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

"Henri Gomez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005/12/21, Bill Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> For Servlet 2.5, the highlights are: >> Requires 1.5 as minimum Java version. >> Needs to support Annotations (probably the biggest project). >> Some minor changes to S

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37854] - Too strict Extension-List analysis

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

> Sorry, so far nobody has had the sense to propose returning to the good old > TC 3.3 Interceptors ;-). It looks like Evolution is here to stay. I don't know if Interceptors would be a good solutions but I'd really like to have something similar to Apache modules. --

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Project jakarta-tomcat-jasper_tc5 (in module jakarta-tomcat-jasper_tc5) failed

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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project jakarta-tomcat-jasper_tc5 has an issue affecting its community integration. This

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Project jakarta-tomcat-jasper_tc5 (in module jakarta-tomcat-jasper_tc5) failed

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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project jakarta-tomcat-jasper_tc5 has an issue affecting its community integration. This

svn commit: r358283 - /tomcat/container/tc5.5.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml

Author: remm Date: Wed Dec 21 05:05:15 2005 New Revision: 358283 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358283&view=rev Log: - Changelog update. Modified: tomcat/container/tc5.5.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml Modified: tomcat/container/tc5.5.x/webapps/docs/changelog.xml URL: http://svn.apache

svn commit: r358285 - in /tomcat/jasper/tc5.5.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/runtime: BodyContentImpl.java JspFactoryImpl.java

Author: remm Date: Wed Dec 21 05:09:42 2005 New Revision: 358285 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358285&view=rev Log: - Ok, so I used a Java 5 API. Modified: tomcat/jasper/tc5.5.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/runtime/BodyContentImpl.java tomcat/jasper/tc5.5.x/jasper2/src/s

Jasper in Tomcat 5.0.x

Hi, If new Tomcat 5.0.x releases are made, I would be in favor of using the Jasper from Tomcat 5.5.x. IMO, using a branch for Jasper was only justified while features were being added and stabilization was needed, but in the end, the only significant one was the update to the compiler. Rémy

Re: svn commit: r358285 - in /tomcat/jasper/tc5.5.x/jasper2/src/share/org/apache/jasper/runtime: BodyContentImpl.java JspFactoryImpl.java

Just wondering if/why this is better than simply calling: Boolean.getBoolean( "org.apache.jasper.runtime.BodyContentImpl.LIMIT_BUFFER" ); All of them end up calling the same method anyway, but getBoolean() seems clearer to me in this case and was just wondering if there is something bad about

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36994] - httpsession.getId() throws ISE after invalidation

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

I would really like to have something more modular too - I understand that NIO and the other connector stuff is unlikely to see the main branch, but I think 'minimal standalone + modules' deserves a chance. Even if we continue to ship by default a bloated tomcat, with all the features anyone can

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

+1 to Costin's stuff... I've been itching for a truly minimal Tomcat distro for a while... Yoav On 12/21/05, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would really like to have something more modular too - I understand > that NIO and the > other connector stuff is unlikely to see the main b

svn commit: r358384 - in /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs: config/workers.xml howto/workers.xml

Author: keith Date: Wed Dec 21 13:13:53 2005 New Revision: 358384 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358384&view=rev Log: Document the mount workers property as an alternative to JkMount Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/config/workers.xml tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/how

svn commit: r358402 - in /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk: native/netscape/jk_nsapi_plugin.c xdocs/changelog.xml

Author: markt Date: Wed Dec 21 14:37:23 2005 New Revision: 358402 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358402&view=rev Log: Fix bug 35862. NSAPI attempts to read freed memory and to dereference a null pointer. - Patch provided by Brian Kavanagh As far as my limited jk/C knowledge goes, the p

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35862] - Tomcat Connector:JK/AJP: JK Status Worker accesses freed memory for NSAPI plugin

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

svn commit: r358404 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/webapp/

Author: markt Date: Wed Dec 21 14:41:38 2005 New Revision: 358404 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358404&view=rev Log: Repo clean up in connectors Removed: tomcat/connectors/trunk/webapp/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [E

svn commit: r358405 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/naming/

Author: markt Date: Wed Dec 21 14:41:52 2005 New Revision: 358405 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358405&view=rev Log: Repo clean up in connectors Removed: tomcat/connectors/trunk/naming/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [E

svn commit: r358406 - /tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native2/

Author: markt Date: Wed Dec 21 14:42:19 2005 New Revision: 358406 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=358406&view=rev Log: Repo clean up in connectors Removed: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native2/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37854] - Too strict Extension-List analysis

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

- What could prevent TC 6.x to became more modular ? - Design, commercial dependencies or personal decisions. Why not send a sort of vote on some possible architectures and plans ? 2005/12/21, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > +1 to Costin's stuff... I've been itching for a truly minimal Tomc

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 37044] - JAASRealm / RealmBase role checking bug ?

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

Well, it's not about 'vote' or plans, it's more about what people have time to do. I have checked in the build files for a 'standalone' tomcat in the sandbox, I've been using the single jar almost exclusively, seems to work fine. But I have a feeling I'm the only one interested in this :-). Removi

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38001] New: - TruncatedClassFile when loadind applets

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38001] - TruncatedClassFile when loadind applets

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: Tomcat 6 plans (JSP 2.1)

I'm willing to help... Yoav On 12/21/05, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, it's not about 'vote' or plans, it's more about what people have > time to do. > > I have checked in the build files for a 'standalone' tomcat in the > sandbox, I've been using the single jar almost exclu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 38001] - TruncatedClassFile when loadind applets

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35461] - bad request http 400 using mod_jk 1.2.13. After downgrading to 1.3.33 and mod_jk 1.2.5 the problems have gone. Problems occur again after using the combination Apache Webse

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

TCK Issue with Tomcat 5.5.12

The Geronimo project has encountered a TCK issue running with Tomcat 5.5.12. We'd appreciate your help with the problem. In the test, a POST Request without a message body is being received and a 403 "The request body was too large to be cached during the authentication process" is being im

Re: TCK Issue with Tomcat 5.5.12

"Kevan Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > The Geronimo project has encountered a TCK issue running with Tomcat > 5.5.12. We'd appreciate your help with the problem. > I hope that you know that you've just violated your NDA by posting this on a public list :).