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

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

2003-09-05 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
Mike wrote: I must disagree with you here. I responded to your bug report about 5 hours after you posted it. I was unable to reproduce this problem given the details you have provided. If you have some more detail about how to reproduce this problem, or perhaps a wire log, I would be

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

2003-09-05 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
I will take your sample and attempt to reproduce it here. Unfortunately (for debugging this) I am using Commons VFS, which in turn uses HttpClient, so maybe it is some usage/re-usage/configuration sequence that causes this. I will see what I can do to reproduce. I found the settings that VFS

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

2003-09-05 Thread Kalnichevski, Oleg
-Original Message- From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 7:09 PM To: Commons HttpClient Project Subject: Re: [VFS|HttpClient] Re: [VFS] Crashes in getContent() Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote: Adam, We will be more than happy to play by the rules

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

2003-09-05 Thread Kalnichevski, Oleg
Nobody said that you need a cvs module per development branch (and I have no idea where you'd get that from...). I am glad I have misunderstood (or misinterpreted) Adam's statement. (The name Gump is not an abbreviation BTW) My apologies who felt insulted by that Chris, Adam Please

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

2003-09-05 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
I updated the bug database (I believe) so this is posted there. FWIIW: I do not believe I am receiving e-mails from the bug tracker. Are other folks? Did you get my update? regards Adam - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL

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

2003-09-05 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
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 HEAD, this is a totally different kind of a problem, and it

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

2003-09-05 Thread Kalnichevski, Oleg
something? Please advise. Oleg -Original Message- From: Adam R. B. Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 6:30 PM To: Commons HttpClient Project Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [VFS|HttpClient] Re: [VFS] Crashes in getContent() Oleg wrote: Adam, with all due

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

2003-09-05 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
Oleg wrote: We will be more than happy to play by the rules, as long as they are clearly articulated and agreed upon, not just imposed upon us. I completely agree, and like I said -- these aren't even mandatory rules more here is how to play nicely w/ other Gumpers. I also agree it is upon the

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

2003-09-04 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
Folks, what was the outcome of this discussion? From my perspective, it fizzled and died here. I logged a bug report on HttpClient (on one crash I received) but I don't believe any action has occurred. The Krysalis stack of projects still fail nightly on Gump with VFS/HttpClient. Please see:

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

2003-08-22 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
Mike wrote: Yes, it looks like you are using HttpClient from HEAD. 2.0 code has been moved into a branch and we've started 2.1 in HEAD. All unit tests are passing but HEAD contains essentially alpha code. If you are looking for something stable I suggest 2.0. Mostly

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

2003-08-21 Thread Michael Becke
: Thursday, August 21, 2003 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [VFS|HttpClient] Re: [VFS] Crashes in getContent() Adam, I think HttpClient used to perform unit tests after compiling. However this seems to have changed somehow? Still, be assured that the HttpClient repository is usually (modulo checkin mistakes

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

2003-08-21 Thread Adam R. B. Jack
: [VFS] Crashes in getContent() Adam, I think HttpClient used to perform unit tests after compiling. However this seems to have changed somehow? Still, be assured that the HttpClient repository is usually (modulo checkin mistakes) in a state where all tests succeed. All committers are told