On 3/10/06, George Daswani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Allen, > > I've also noticed that the 2.1 release is using ACEGI RC2, but the trunk > is still using ACEGI RC1 (tools/spring, moreover the security.xml file > is still referencing the RC1 syntax) - pulled it a few minutes ago from > svn. > > Is this by design?
No, this is simply because the changes in 2.1 haven't been merged into the trunk yet. Matt > > Thanks, > George > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Allen Gilliland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 4:29 PM > To: roller-dev > Subject: RE: Roller 2.1 / Jetty 5.1.10 / Postgres 8.1.2? > > Actually, I had already asked about that and I believe everyone was in > agreement. I just hadn't commited it yet is all. > > -- Allen > > > On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 16:28, George Daswani wrote: > > If Roller is going Servlet 2.4 - then it would be wise to upgrade > > taglibs also from 1.0.3 -> 1.1.2 > > > > George Daswani > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 11:33 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Roller 2.1 / Jetty 5.1.10 / Postgres 8.1.2? > > > > I just tried building for 2.4 and it looks like XDoclet did the right > > > thing. I'll commit the 1 character change to build.xml once I verify > > that. > > > > ROL-873: Supplied web.xml is not Servlet 2.4 compliant > > Is now set to fix-for Roller 2.2 > > > > - Dave > > > > > > On Mar 7, 2006, at 3:40 AM, Anil Gangolli wrote: > > > > > Yipes. Did we release another version without switching the > > > web.xml and its declared type formally to the Servlet 2.4 DTD? I > > > thought we all agreed to this back in December, but I guess it > > > didn't actually happen and nobody caught it. Were issues > encountered? > > > --a. > > > > > > > > > Corbett J. Klempay wrote: > > >> Hello all -- > > >> > > >> I'm a first time Roller user. I just downloaded 2.1 and thought > > >> I'd have a go at mating it with my existing Jetty 5.1.10 and > > >> Postgres 8.1.2 installations. Is anyone else already running this > > > >> (or a very similar) combination? I'd appreciate any guidance (as > > >> the Jetty-specific install document seems pretty stale at this > > >> point). > > >> > > >> I did see the earlier thread started by Amy about Jetty being > > >> unhappy with the presence of dispatch elements in web.xml; I have > > >> commented those out already. I'm not really all that > > >> knowledgeable with Jetty, either -- up to now, it's just been > > >> hosting a big JAlbum site. > > >> > > >> Thanks! > > >> > > >> - Corbett > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
