Re: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[costinm]

+1

I think we should tag the code with jk_1_4 ( considering the jk that was
included with 3.1 == jk1.1, etc ). It seems jk_1_4 will work
with 3.3, 4.0.x and 4.1 ( and the C code can be used for 3.2.x for bug
fixes ).

Regarding jk2, I'm still working, the current strugle is with the unix
domain sockets ( since JFC commited the jk implementation, and I promised
I'll do the java side ). I did some more changes in mod_jk(2) config, now
seting "JkWebapp" in a Location context works for virtual hosts and almost
everything else. I do plan few more config changes - automatically
restrict WEB-INF, etc, and I want to get at least basic info out of the
status worker. On the java side we have a first version, but I still have
to integrate it with either the interceptor/connector, or ( assuming
everything works as it seems ) in JkServlet ( using what I proposed last
year, i.e. web.xml/'standard' servlets + 'trusted apps' + a bit of magic).
Sorry it takes so long, but I have a lot of other work to do...

Costin


On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Kevin Seguin wrote:

> there was a thread a couple weeks ago regarding what to do with j-t-c and
> tomcat 4.0.2.  i believe it was decided that the 4.0.2 release would contain
> the same jars from j-t-c (tomcat-ajp.jar, tomcat-util.jar) as 4.0.1 did.
>
> well, i just did some quick tests with the 4.0.2-b1 dist and the head of
> j-t-c, and all seemed to be in working order.
>
> so, i think it might be a good idea to try to release the latest stuff from
> j-t-c with 4.0.2 for a couple of reasons:
>
>   *) if we release and tag j-t-c along with jakarta-tomcat-4.0, i think
> it'll
>  be easier to do maintenance, fix bugs, etc..  i'm not only talking
> about
>  the java code in j-t-c, but also the c code.
>   *) there have been some bug fixes in j-t-c since 4.0.1 -- these may as
> well
>  be released :)
>
> thoughts?
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[Kevin Seguin]

> I think we should tag the code with jk_1_4 ( considering the 
> jk that was
> included with 3.1 == jk1.1, etc ). It seems jk_1_4 will work
> with 3.3, 4.0.x and 4.1 ( and the C code can be used for 3.2.x for bug
> fixes ).
> 

jk_1_4 is fine with me -- as long as it is tagged with something :)

> Regarding jk2, I'm still working, the current strugle is with the unix
> domain sockets ( since JFC commited the jk implementation, 
> and I promised
> I'll do the java side ). I did some more changes in mod_jk(2) 
> config, now
> seting "JkWebapp" in a Location context works for virtual 
> hosts and almost
> everything else. I do plan few more config changes - automatically
> restrict WEB-INF, etc, and I want to get at least basic info 
> out of the
> status worker. On the java side we have a first version, but 
> I still have
> to integrate it with either the interceptor/connector, or ( assuming
> everything works as it seems ) in JkServlet ( using what I 
> proposed last
> year, i.e. web.xml/'standard' servlets + 'trusted apps' + a 
> bit of magic).
> Sorry it takes so long, but I have a lot of other work to do...
> 

i was thinking that for tomcat 4.0.2, the old stuff, jk/native,
jk/java/org/apache/ajp, would be considered the 'stable' (althought still
beta quality) code, and the new jk2, o.a.jk would be considered still
'experimental'.  just a thought, though - i don't know that much about the
new code :)

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[costinm]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Kevin Seguin wrote:

> i was thinking that for tomcat 4.0.2, the old stuff, jk/native,
> jk/java/org/apache/ajp, would be considered the 'stable' (althought still
> beta quality) code, and the new jk2, o.a.jk would be considered still
> 'experimental'.  just a thought, though - i don't know that much about the

That's what I was thinking too :-)

The new code is not ready, and even if it would be, it's important to get
the stable code tagged and released first.

Costin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[Daniel Rall]

Kevin Seguin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> there was a thread a couple weeks ago regarding what to do with j-t-c and
> tomcat 4.0.2.  i believe it was decided that the 4.0.2 release would contain
> the same jars from j-t-c (tomcat-ajp.jar, tomcat-util.jar) as 4.0.1 did.
>
> well, i just did some quick tests with the 4.0.2-b1 dist and the head of
> j-t-c, and all seemed to be in working order.
>
> so, i think it might be a good idea to try to release the latest stuff from
> j-t-c with 4.0.2 for a couple of reasons:
>
>   *) if we release and tag j-t-c along with jakarta-tomcat-4.0, i think
> it'll 
>  be easier to do maintenance, fix bugs, etc..  i'm not only talking
> about
>  the java code in j-t-c, but also the c code.
>   *) there have been some bug fixes in j-t-c since 4.0.1 -- these may as
> well
>  be released :)

The mod_webapp connector code is definitely in a freshening.  :)

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[Daniel Rall]

Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The mod_webapp connector code is definitely in a freshening.  :)
^
 need of

Specifically, it would be great to get in Pier's fix to the file
upload problem (if not the rest of the changes as well).

Index: catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/connector/warp/WarpRequest.java 
=== 
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-tomcat-connectors/webapp/java/WarpRequest.java,v 
retrieving revision 1.9 
retrieving revision 1.10 
diff -u -r1.9 -r1.10 
--- catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/connector/warp/WarpRequest.java  2001/07/25 
22:32:05 1.9 
+++ catalina/src/share/org/apache/catalina/connector/warp/WarpRequest.java  2001/10/19 
+19:18:28 1.10 
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ 
 throw new IOException("Invalid WARP packet type for body"); 

 if (this.packet.pointermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[Remy Maucherat]

> +1
>
> I think we should tag the code with jk_1_4 ( considering the jk that was
> included with 3.1 == jk1.1, etc ). It seems jk_1_4 will work
> with 3.3, 4.0.x and 4.1 ( and the C code can be used for 3.2.x for bug
> fixes ).

+1.
When it's done and when you can confirm it's working, I think we can release
4.0.2 b2 (I have only a few patches to commit to the branch and it should be
ok).

Could we do the same for webapp ?

Remy


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[Kevin Seguin]

>
> > I think we should tag the code with jk_1_4 ( considering 
> the jk that was
> > included with 3.1 == jk1.1, etc ). It seems jk_1_4 will work
> > with 3.3, 4.0.x and 4.1 ( and the C code can be used for 
> 3.2.x for bug
> > fixes ).
> 
> +1.
> When it's done and when you can confirm it's working, I think 
> we can release
> 4.0.2 b2 (I have only a few patches to commit to the branch 
> and it should be
> ok).
> 

i believe the jk (not jk2) code, both native (jk/native) and java
(jk/java/org/apache/ajp), in j-t-c to be working and in a stable state.

> Could we do the same for webapp ?
> 

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: tomcat 4.0.2 and jakarta-tomcat-connectors

[costinm]

There is a small (possible) bug I'm debugging, related with lb which in
some cases seem to fail to be 'sticky' ( it's not specific to jk1.4,
it has been around forever from what I can see ).

The fix should be small, I still have problems reproducing the bug
so I can test the fix. Don't wait for it - tag whenever you're ready,
it shouldn't be critical.

( BTW, I just got Unix sockets to work !!! Thanks Jean-frederic ! )

Costin


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: