DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17569] - Include generated website in the distribution

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17569] - Include generated website in the distribution

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17569] New: - missing xdocs

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: HTTP Post HTML Version

2003-03-01 Thread Ross Rankin
Hey after a full week it works!! The server would not accept a HTTP/1.1 post. Setting each Get or Post Method to HTTP/1.0 works like a dream! I didn't notice that function tucked into the MethodBase. Thanks for all your help Oleg with this and all my other questions. I would love to buy you a

[PATCH] SSL Tunneling Connection Timeout

2003-03-01 Thread Michael Becke
As discussed in the IRC session on Thursday here is a patch that should "fix" the timeout problem that occurs when using Https through a proxy. This fixes the problem by not allowing HttpConnections that are tunneled to be reused. This is by no means a perfect solution but it should add some

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17563] - SSL Tunneling does not work with MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17563] - SSL Tunneling does not work with MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17563] - SSL Tunneling does not work with MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17563] - SSL Tunneling does not work with MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17563] New: - SSL Tunneling does not work with MultiThreadedHttpConnectionManager

2003-03-01 Thread 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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: HTTP Post HTML Version

2003-03-01 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski
Ross, Currently HTTP/1.0 is supported on per request (method) basis. We realize this is an architectural deficiently and are planning to support HTTP versioning on per connection basis in the future Currently HttpCliet can be configured to fall back onto HTTP/1.0 in the following way: HttpClient

Re: MultipartPostMethod creating malformed headers?

2003-03-01 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski
On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 21:29, Daniel Walsh wrote: > >What library are you using to parse 'multipart/form-data' > > formatted requests? > > We actually have our own classes to parse a multipart/form-data formatted > request. I guess they could be a bit outdated at this point, or possible > never we