Re: @author tags

[Ortwin Glück]

To make it easier for us, we could even have people compose and maintain 
their own list of contributions.

Ortwin Glück wrote:
Yes, let's just put together that 'thank you' page (think of it like the 
credits of movie). The question is if we just want to list the names or 
if we actually want to go into some level of detail as to how much or 
what the person contributed.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Missing HttpClient CLAs

[Ortwin Glück]

Jeff,

(nice to hear from you BTW)
Sung-Gu has basically done all the work on URI related classes. He was 
quite active when I joined the project (proxy and SSL patches, 
remember?) Last I heard from him was when we had a major argument about 
a method that messed with encodings and he was unwilling to provide a 
test case for it and nobody else could understand what the method was 
supposed to do. Unfortunately I assume he was pissed off by the whole 
story. Please refer to the email archive for more details. You should be 
able to contact him by email though. Sean Sullivan I guess was before my 
time.

Jeff Dever wrote:
A note from Sam Ruby on the PMC list:


A project within IBM is looking to ship httpclient.  Scanning the code,
I found two individuals who made notable contributions to this codebase
who have NOT signed CLAs:
   jericho:Sung-Gu Park
   sullis: Sean Sullivan
Before I dig further, does anybody happen to know anything about the
status of either of these two individuals?


Have either of these two contributors been at all active in HttpClient
in recent memory?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26070] - [RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=26070

[RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-11 03:49 ---
Hi Oleg,

Keeping the API compatibility definitely makes things a little nastier here.  The 
getRequestBody* 
methods could possibly be removed.  I don't believe they serve much of a purpose in 
general use.  The 
setReqestBody* and content length methods should just be deprecated I think.  They are 
too widely 
used to be removed I think.  They are also much less of a hack.  How does that sound?

Mike

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=27589

MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-11 03:39 ---
Hi Gael,

Here's a quick stab at this one.  Please let me know if this is what you were looking 
for.  I do not know 
if this change will make it into the 2.0 code base.  It may have to wait until 3.0 for 
an official inclusion.  
How does everyone else feel about this?

Mike

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [VOTE] Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level

[Saifadam Pathan]

+0
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Becke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Commons HttpClient Project" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:28 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level


> This topic has been pretty quiet since I last brought it up, so I guess
> it's time for a vote.  I suggest that we promote HttpClient to a
> Jakarta level project.  Please vote as follows:
>
> 
> --
>   Vote:  Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level
>   [ ] +1 I am in favor of the move, and will help support it.
>   [x] +0 I am in favor of the move, but am unable to help support it.
>   [ ] -0 I am not in favor of the move.
>   [ ] -1 I am against this proposal (must include a reason).
>
> 
> --
>
> Mike
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=27589

MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-11 03:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=10752)
Take 1

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 27589] New: - MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=27589

MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown

   Summary: MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown
   Product: Commons
   Version: 2.0 Final
  Platform: PC
OS/Version: Other
Status: NEW
  Severity: Enhancement
  Priority: Other
 Component: HttpClient
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


MultiThreadedConnectionManager should provide a shutdown() method to release 
all its resources, it is currently using daemon threads that cannot be stopped 
and HTTP connections that cannot be released.
This is annoying when the pool of connection is created within a web 
application that is undeployed and re-deployed (i.e. the JVM is not restarted) 
consuming resources on local and remote servers.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Status Code 302 Found

[Oleg Kalnichevski]

Fong Tze,
Take a look at the following document. I should give you enough material
to be able to tackle the problem

http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/httpclient/redirects.html

Oleg



On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 11:54, Khong Fong Tze wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>   Thanks for reply.  I upgraded HttpClient to version 2.0.  However, it doesn't make 
> a difference.  I am still having the status code 302 Found returned from the 3rd 
> party host.
> 
>Any other suggestions?
> 
> Regards,
> Fong Tze
> 
> > Hi Fong Tze,
> > 
> > 2.0 alpha3 had some serious issues, especially related to 100-continue  
> > handling.  The final release of 2.0 is out and as such it is the only  
> > supported version of HttpClient 2.0.  I highly recommend upgrading.
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > On Mar 9, 2004, at 8:09 PM, Khong Fong Tze wrote:
> > 
> > > I have a web app which uses HttpClient to communicate with a third  
> > > party server under HTTPS protocol.  It is running fine in JRUN which  
> > > uses JDK 1.3.1.  The status code returned from the 3rd party host is  
> > > 100.
> > >
> > >
> > > I try to run the same web app in IBM JDK 1.31 SR6 or Sun JDK 1.41 or  
> > > IBM JDK 1.41:-
> > >
> > > statusCode = client.executeMethod(method)  always returns me status  
> > > code 302 Found.
> > >
> > > The "Location" response header reads as this:-
> > > "Location:  
> > > https://xxx.xxx.xxx/? 
> > > err_code=0&err_desc=No+Error2C+refer+to+status+code+for+detail&merchant 
> > > _id="
> > >
> > >
> > > Both environments are using the same version of HttpClient  
> > > (2.0-alpha3-dev).
> > >
> > > I wonder why the same web app would give different status code.  What  
> > > could be the causes?
> > >
> > > Pls help! Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Fong Tze
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:  
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26070] - [RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=26070

[RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-10 22:19 ---
Mike,
I like the patch but can't help thinking that 2.0 API compatibility code defeats
the whole beauty of it. I would rather see all the setRequestBody /
getRequestBody* methods removed for good. After all, we are going to ship a
major version upgrade.

Oleg

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Jeff Dever]

I don't think that the final word has been said on the use of @author
tags by the PMC.  At the moment, "discouraged" seems to be more of a
suggestion than a requirement.  It is unclear on what benefit removing
the tags will have, from a legal perspective.  It is also my feeling
that if we are to remove @author tags, that some comparable replacement
mechanism should be proposed.  All Jakarta projects will be struggling
with this.

I brought this issue up for clairification on the PMC list, due to the
concerns raised on this list.

More to come.
-jsd


Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:

>>As far as timing goes, we can be pretty flexible I think.  My preference 
>>would be to stop adding author tags now and begin putting people on a 
>>thank you list.  We can then migrate existing @authors when the time 
>>seems right, (i.e. whenever someone gets stuck doing it).
>>
> 
> 
> Sounds like a compromise. I still wish, though, the board would
> reconsider.
> 
> Oleg
> 
> 
> 
>>Mike
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[John Keyes]

We had this same conversation on commons-dev.  This does appear to be a  
contentious issue.  Personally I don't really mind if my name appears  
in a file or not.  I think it is all about the community.

There is a difference between the developer and the contributor though.  
 I think it is the contributor's who deserve the real credit.  I work  
on some open source software because it scratches an itch.  Therefore,  
a mention that I am a scratcher is enough for me.  But, for people who  
provide a contribution (in many cases this is a once off) to be  
mentioned is a great feeling.

As for a solution, I can't think of one that is satisfactory for  
everyone.  It seems it is being resolved on a per-project basis.

-John K

On 10 Mar 2004, at 18:59, Michael McGrady wrote:

My understanding of human psychology leads me to think that whomever  
came up with this idea has underestimated the importance of the  
@author tags to the open source community.

At 09:49 AM 3/10/2004, you wrote:
Michael, are you saying that removing @author tags would be a  
mistake? What in particular worries you?  In what way do you think it  
would "bite us on the butt"?

Mike

Michael McGrady wrote:

I personally think that this is a much more important mistake than  
people may realize.  I would counsel you to go slowly on this one.   
This one may bite you on the butt.
At 11:02 PM 3/9/2004, you wrote:

I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be  
pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I  
will not
object

Oleg

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 04:32, Michael Becke wrote:
> The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of  
@author
> tags.  When first starting out I always enjoyed seeing my name in
> "lights", though I do agree with the ASF's opinion on this  
matter.  If
> we come to a consensus to remove @authors I suggest that we  
remove them
> from all existing code, as well as leave them out of new  
additions.
> Any comments?
>
> Mike
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:  ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004
>
> 
> >   - author tags are officially discouraged. these create  
difficulties
> > in
> > establishing the proper ownership and the protection of our
> > committers. there are other social issues dealing with
> > collaborative
> > development, but the Board is concerned about the legal
> > ramifications
> > around the use of author tags
> >
> >   - it is quite acceptable and encouraged to recognize  
developers'
> > efforts
> > in a CHANGES file, or some other descriptive file which is
> > associated
> > with the overall PMC or release rather than individual  
files.
> 
>
>
>  
 
-
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

 
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26070] - [RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=26070

[RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-10 20:18 ---
I have added a few test cases to the latest Mohammad's patch. If nobody objects
I'll commit the patch in 24 hours.

Oleg

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26070] - [RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.

[bugzilla]

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_bug.cgi?id=26070

[RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-10 20:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=10750)
Latest Mohammad's patch + test cases

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Oleg Kalnichevski]

> As far as timing goes, we can be pretty flexible I think.  My preference 
> would be to stop adding author tags now and begin putting people on a 
> thank you list.  We can then migrate existing @authors when the time 
> seems right, (i.e. whenever someone gets stuck doing it).
> 

Sounds like a compromise. I still wish, though, the board would
reconsider.

Oleg


> Mike
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Michael McGrady]

My understanding of human psychology leads me to think that whomever came 
up with this idea has underestimated the importance of the @author tags to 
the open source community.

At 09:49 AM 3/10/2004, you wrote:
Michael, are you saying that removing @author tags would be a mistake? 
What in particular worries you?  In what way do you think it would "bite 
us on the butt"?

Mike

Michael McGrady wrote:

I personally think that this is a much more important mistake than people 
may realize.  I would counsel you to go slowly on this one.  This one may 
bite you on the butt.
At 11:02 PM 3/9/2004, you wrote:

I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will not
object
Oleg

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 04:32, Michael Becke wrote:
> The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author
> tags.  When first starting out I always enjoyed seeing my name in
> "lights", though I do agree with the ASF's opinion on this matter.  If
> we come to a consensus to remove @authors I suggest that we remove them
> from all existing code, as well as leave them out of new additions.
> Any comments?
>
> Mike
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:  ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004
>
> 
> >   - author tags are officially discouraged. these create difficulties
> > in
> > establishing the proper ownership and the protection of our
> > committers. there are other social issues dealing with
> > collaborative
> > development, but the Board is concerned about the legal
> > ramifications
> > around the use of author tags
> >
> >   - it is quite acceptable and encouraged to recognize developers'
> > efforts
> > in a CHANGES file, or some other descriptive file which is
> > associated
> > with the overall PMC or release rather than individual files.
> 
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Status Code 302 Found

[Khong Fong Tze]

Hi,

  Thanks for reply.  I upgraded HttpClient to version 2.0.  However, it doesn't make a 
difference.  I am still having the status code 302 Found returned from the 3rd party 
host.

   Any other suggestions?

Regards,
Fong Tze

> Hi Fong Tze,
> 
> 2.0 alpha3 had some serious issues, especially related to 100-continue  
> handling.  The final release of 2.0 is out and as such it is the only  
> supported version of HttpClient 2.0.  I highly recommend upgrading.
> 
> Mike
> 
> On Mar 9, 2004, at 8:09 PM, Khong Fong Tze wrote:
> 
> > I have a web app which uses HttpClient to communicate with a third  
> > party server under HTTPS protocol.  It is running fine in JRUN which  
> > uses JDK 1.3.1.  The status code returned from the 3rd party host is  
> > 100.
> >
> >
> > I try to run the same web app in IBM JDK 1.31 SR6 or Sun JDK 1.41 or  
> > IBM JDK 1.41:-
> >
> > statusCode = client.executeMethod(method)  always returns me status  
> > code 302 Found.
> >
> > The "Location" response header reads as this:-
> > "Location:  
> > https://xxx.xxx.xxx/? 
> > err_code=0&err_desc=No+Error2C+refer+to+status+code+for+detail&merchant 
> > _id="
> >
> >
> > Both environments are using the same version of HttpClient  
> > (2.0-alpha3-dev).
> >
> > I wonder why the same web app would give different status code.  What  
> > could be the causes?
> >
> > Pls help! Thanks!
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Fong Tze
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail:  
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Michael Becke]

Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:

That's the whole point. It would be unjust to no differentiate
between regular day-to-day contributors (whom we have a few) and a
single one liner patch contribution. I do think we have to go into
some details to make such a 'thank you' page meaningful.
I agree.  We would want to mention people with a little detail about 
what they contributed.

Just a wild thought: what if we abandoned @author tags simultaneously
with the planned 4.0 rewrite, compiling the 'thank you' list as the
bits of code get migrated from the old jakarta-commons tree into (if
that works out, of course) jakarta level repository? What if we kept
the tags for the 3.0 release, as long as we stay in the Jakarta
Commons?
There are a couple of questions here.  One involves our move out of 
commons, and the other is about timing.

In regard to moving, I think we should figure that out separately.  I 
don't think we know quite yet how long the move will take, and if we 
want to do it pre or post 3.0.

As far as timing goes, we can be pretty flexible I think.  My preference 
would be to stop adding author tags now and begin putting people on a 
thank you list.  We can then migrate existing @authors when the time 
seems right, (i.e. whenever someone gets stuck doing it).

Mike

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Michael Becke]

Michael, are you saying that removing @author tags would be a mistake? 
What in particular worries you?  In what way do you think it would "bite 
us on the butt"?

Mike

Michael McGrady wrote:

I personally think that this is a much more important mistake than 
people may realize.  I would counsel you to go slowly on this one.  This 
one may bite you on the butt.

At 11:02 PM 3/9/2004, you wrote:

I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will not
object
Oleg

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 04:32, Michael Becke wrote:
> The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author
> tags.  When first starting out I always enjoyed seeing my name in
> "lights", though I do agree with the ASF's opinion on this matter.  If
> we come to a consensus to remove @authors I suggest that we remove them
> from all existing code, as well as leave them out of new additions.
> Any comments?
>
> Mike
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:  ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004
>
> 
> >   - author tags are officially discouraged. these create difficulties
> > in
> > establishing the proper ownership and the protection of our
> > committers. there are other social issues dealing with
> > collaborative
> > development, but the Board is concerned about the legal
> > ramifications
> > around the use of author tags
> >
> >   - it is quite acceptable and encouraged to recognize developers'
> > efforts
> > in a CHANGES file, or some other descriptive file which is
> > associated
> > with the overall PMC or release rather than individual files.
> 
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Missing HttpClient CLAs

[Michael Becke]

Not that I'm aware of.  The last thing I remember is a patch to URI by 
Sung-Gu.  That was probably a year ago.

Mike

Jeff Dever wrote:
A note from Sam Ruby on the PMC list:


A project within IBM is looking to ship httpclient.  Scanning the code,
I found two individuals who made notable contributions to this codebase
who have NOT signed CLAs:
   jericho:Sung-Gu Park
   sullis: Sean Sullivan
Before I dig further, does anybody happen to know anything about the
status of either of these two individuals?


Have either of these two contributors been at all active in HttpClient
in recent memory?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Missing HttpClient CLAs

[Jeff Dever]

A note from Sam Ruby on the PMC list:

> A project within IBM is looking to ship httpclient.  Scanning the code,
> I found two individuals who made notable contributions to this codebase
> who have NOT signed CLAs:
> 
> jericho:Sung-Gu Park
> sullis: Sean Sullivan
> 
> Before I dig further, does anybody happen to know anything about the
> status of either of these two individuals?

Have either of these two contributors been at all active in HttpClient
in recent memory?

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [VOTE] Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level

[Jeff Dever]

Fantastic!  +0

>  Vote:  Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level
>  [ ] +1 I am in favor of the move, and will help support it.
>  [x] +0 I am in favor of the move, but am unable to help support it.
>  [ ] -0 I am not in favor of the move.
>  [ ] -1 I am against this proposal (must include a reason).


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Michael McGrady]

I personally think that this is a much more important mistake than people 
may realize.  I would counsel you to go slowly on this one.  This one may 
bite you on the butt.

At 11:02 PM 3/9/2004, you wrote:
I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will not
object
Oleg

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 04:32, Michael Becke wrote:
> The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author
> tags.  When first starting out I always enjoyed seeing my name in
> "lights", though I do agree with the ASF's opinion on this matter.  If
> we come to a consensus to remove @authors I suggest that we remove them
> from all existing code, as well as leave them out of new additions.
> Any comments?
>
> Mike
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:  ASF Board Summary for February 18, 2004
>
> 
> >   - author tags are officially discouraged. these create difficulties
> > in
> > establishing the proper ownership and the protection of our
> > committers. there are other social issues dealing with
> > collaborative
> > development, but the Board is concerned about the legal
> > ramifications
> > around the use of author tags
> >
> >   - it is quite acceptable and encouraged to recognize developers'
> > efforts
> > in a CHANGES file, or some other descriptive file which is
> > associated
> > with the overall PMC or release rather than individual files.
> 
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: @author tags

[Kalnichevski, Oleg]

> if we actually want to go into some level of detail as to how much or
> what the person contributed.

That's the whole point. It would be unjust to no differentiate between regular 
day-to-day contributors (whom we have a few) and a single one liner patch 
contribution. I do think we have to go into some details to make such a 'thank you' 
page meaningful.

Just a wild thought: what if we abandoned @author tags simultaneously with the planned 
4.0 rewrite, compiling the 'thank you' list as the bits of code get migrated from the 
old jakarta-commons tree into (if that works out, of course) jakarta level repository? 
What if we kept the tags for the 3.0 release, as long as we stay in the Jakarta 
Commons?

Oleg

-Original Message-
From: Ortwin Glück [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 15:43
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags




Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
> I could also imagine some sort of 'thank you' page listing individuals with their 
> respective contributions.
> The real question is what is to be done with all the contributions made up to now.

Yes, let's just put together that 'thank you' page (think of it like the
credits of movie). The question is if we just want to list the names or
if we actually want to go into some level of detail as to how much or
what the person contributed.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


***
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.  Access 
to this email by anyone other than the intended addressee is unauthorized.  If you are 
not the intended recipient of this message, any review, disclosure, copying, 
distribution, retention, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it 
is prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended recipient, please 
reply to or forward a copy of this message to the sender and delete the message, any 
attachments, and any copies thereof from your system.
***

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Ortwin Glück]

Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
I could also imagine some sort of 'thank you' page listing individuals with their respective contributions. 
The real question is what is to be done with all the contributions made up to now. 
Yes, let's just put together that 'thank you' page (think of it like the 
credits of movie). The question is if we just want to list the names or 
if we actually want to go into some level of detail as to how much or 
what the person contributed.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: @author tags

[Kalnichevski, Oleg]

Mike,
I believe mentioning of individual contributions in the change log should suffice. 
Compilation of the change log involves CVS commits mining anyhow. We just need to be 
doing a better job keeping the change log up to date. Some sort of process automation 
would be nice, for sure.

I could also imagine some sort of 'thank you' page listing individuals with their 
respective contributions. Again, it just takes a bit more discipline on our part.

The real question is what is to be done with all the contributions made up to now. 
Simply stripping away @author tags without giving the due credit to the existing 
contributors in some form would be a little harsh.

Oleg

-Original Message-
From: Michael Becke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 14:26
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags


I agree that removing author tags eliminates one of the big attractions
for casual contributors.  To compensate we should definitely be more
proactive about giving people credit in other ways.  Perhaps we can
come up with a more automated way of showing contributions.  Any ideas?
  Perhaps we can do some mining of the CVS comments?

Mike

On Mar 10, 2004, at 2:18 AM, Adrian Sutton wrote:

> On 10/3/04 5:02 PM, "Oleg Kalnichevski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
>> much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will
>> not
>> object
>
> I'm a big fan of author tags (I like to know who to blame mostly :).  I
> won't argue against them going though but I think we need to be
> quicker to
> add people to the list of contributors on the website to provide some
> credit
> that way.
>
>> Oleg
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian Sutton.
>
> ===
> Kangaroo Point MarchFest is an annual festival of music, art, food and
> culture, that aims to build community spirit and bring all types of
> people together for a time of fun and entertainment.
> Sat March 20th, midday till 10pm, at Kangaroo Point Uniting Church.
> http://www.soulpurpose.com.au/marchfest
> ===
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


***
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.  Access 
to this email by anyone other than the intended addressee is unauthorized.  If you are 
not the intended recipient of this message, any review, disclosure, copying, 
distribution, retention, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it 
is prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you are not the intended recipient, please 
reply to or forward a copy of this message to the sender and delete the message, any 
attachments, and any copies thereof from your system.
***

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Michael Becke]

I agree that removing author tags eliminates one of the big attractions 
for casual contributors.  To compensate we should definitely be more 
proactive about giving people credit in other ways.  Perhaps we can 
come up with a more automated way of showing contributions.  Any ideas? 
 Perhaps we can do some mining of the CVS comments?

Mike

On Mar 10, 2004, at 2:18 AM, Adrian Sutton wrote:

On 10/3/04 5:02 PM, "Oleg Kalnichevski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will 
not
object
I'm a big fan of author tags (I like to know who to blame mostly :).  I
won't argue against them going though but I think we need to be 
quicker to
add people to the list of contributors on the website to provide some 
credit
that way.

Oleg
Regards,

Adrian Sutton.

===
Kangaroo Point MarchFest is an annual festival of music, art, food and
culture, that aims to build community spirit and bring all types of
people together for a time of fun and entertainment.
Sat March 20th, midday till 10pm, at Kangaroo Point Uniting Church.
http://www.soulpurpose.com.au/marchfest
===
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 26070] - [RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.

[Michael Becke]

No worries.  I just wanted to ensure it didn't slip under the radar.

Mike

On Mar 10, 2004, at 1:57 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:

Mike,
I am a bit stressed out at work right now. I'll try to give you some
feedback in the coming days.
Oleg

On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 04:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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_bug.cgi?id=26070

[RFE] Allow streaming of POST methods via chunked transfer encoding.





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-10 
03:21 ---
Works for me...  Any comments on my changes to EntityEnclosingMethod?

Mike

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [VOTE] Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level

[Michael Becke]

+1

On Mar 9, 2004, at 10:58 PM, Michael Becke wrote:

This topic has been pretty quiet since I last brought it up, so I  
guess it's time for a vote.  I suggest that we promote HttpClient to a  
Jakarta level project.  Please vote as follows:

--- 
---
 Vote:  Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level
 [ ] +1 I am in favor of the move, and will help support it.
 [ ] +0 I am in favor of the move, but am unable to help support it.
 [ ] -0 I am not in favor of the move.
 [ ] -1 I am against this proposal (must include a reason).
  
--- 
---

Mike

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:  
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [VOTE] Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level

[Ortwin Glück]

+0

Ortwin Glück
 --
 Vote:  Promote HttpClient to Jakarta level
 [ ] +1 I am in favor of the move, and will help support it.
 [x] +0 I am in favor of the move, but am unable to help support it.
 [ ] -0 I am not in favor of the move.
 [ ] -1 I am against this proposal (must include a reason).
  
 --
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @author tags

[Ortwin Glück]

Michael Becke wrote:

The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author 
tags.  When first starting out I always enjoyed seeing my name in 
"lights", though I do agree with the ASF's opinion on this matter.  If 
we come to a consensus to remove @authors I suggest that we remove them 
from all existing code, as well as leave them out of new additions.   
Any comments?

Mike
I always liked the author tag. But following the news about the SCO vs. 
the rest of the world case makes me a little concerned these days. I 
welcome ASF's decision to protect their contributors from legal issues. 
Removal of author tags are okay with me. There still are CVS logs of 
course and the contributor list on our web site.

Ortwin Glück

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]