DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22940] - gzip content-encoding support

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22940. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

RE: NameValuePair.equals

2003-09-08 Thread Kalnichevski, Oleg
This bit defintely needs to be rewritten. Odi, can you take care of it? Oleg -Original Message- From: Ortwin Glück [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 09:03 To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: NameValuePair.equals I just came over the code: public

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22926] - [patch] Support for digest auth MD5-sess

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22926. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22969] - return value of PostMethod#removeParameter

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22969. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

RE: NameValuePair.equals

2003-09-08 Thread Kalnichevski, Oleg
This particular code and the accompaning test predates The Trojan War and the Fall of Troy. If the test case does not make sense, let's change it as well. Oleg -Original Message- From: Ortwin Glück [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 10:14 To: Commons HttpClient

Re: NameValuePair.equals

2003-09-08 Thread Ortwin Glück
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote: This particular code and the accompaning test predates The Trojan War and the Fall of Troy. If the test case does not make sense, let's change it as well. Oleg *g* It doesn't seem to break anything else apart from that (webapp tests and external ones run through). The

Re: [PATCH] NameValuePair.equals

2003-09-08 Thread Ortwin Glück
see attached patch: removed strict class check from NameValuePair#equals and rewrote code for better readability. Updated API Doc. Test case changed to the modified contract. Index: java/org/apache/commons/httpclient/NameValuePair.java

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22984] - bug in tutorial example on recoverable exceptions

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22984. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15435] - New Preferences Architecture

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

Re: NameValuePair.equals

2003-09-08 Thread Laura Werner
Ortwin Glück wrote: Why is it required that equals returns false if the classes do not match exactly? I thinks this is a weird behaviour for an equals method and should clearly be changed. It's weird behavior, but you have to be careful when changing it to instanceof. If an equals method

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15435] - New Preferences Architecture

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

Re: NameValuePair.equals

2003-09-08 Thread Ortwin Glück
Laura Werner wrote: It's weird behavior, but you have to be careful when changing it to instanceof. If an equals method tries to get too clever and suports equality with other types, you can end up with cases where equals is not symmetric, e.g. a.equals(b)==true but b.equals(a)==false. The

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22926] - [patch] Support for digest auth MD5-sess

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22926. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22926] - [patch] Support for digest auth MD5-sess

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22926. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15435] - New Preferences Architecture

2003-09-08 Thread Michael Becke
I will write a little something about my ideas behind the HttpParamsFactory when I get home tonight. Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT

Re: [VFS|HttpClient] Re: [VFS] Crashes in getContent()

2003-09-08 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Adam R. B. Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oleg wrote: Adam, with all due respect let me point out that we have stable HTTPCLIENT_2_0_BRANCH branch that should be used by those who need API and/or code stability. If GUMP cannot be configured to use any other CVS branch but

Re: [VFS|HttpClient] Re: [VFS] Crashes in getContent()

2003-09-08 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Adam R. B. Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, most of my statement (and now question) is about friend-of-gump behaviour, and having that project is good, but not friendly 'cos it forces work onto sub-projects. I'm not sure. Do you not agree that the project should

Re: [VFS|HttpClient] Re: [VFS] Crashes in getContent()

2003-09-08 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
Stefan wrote: Please note that there already is a commons-httpclient-2.0-branch project in Gump's workspace. It would be trivial for projects to depend on that branch instead of CVS HEAD and in fact jakarta-slide and xml-rpc already do so. Thanks, I'd not seen that. However, most of my

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 22968] - HttpConnection.isResponseAvailable() calls setSoTimeout() but does not catch IOException

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22968. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15435] - New Preferences Architecture

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15435] - New Preferences Architecture

2003-09-08 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.