With reference to my (OP) Users mailing list thread with exactly the
same title as this...
I have attached an svn diff for a minor change to the README.txt in the
root directory of the site svn repository:-
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/site/trunk
Please feel free to change it if
On 17/03/14 13:13, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 03/03/2014 13:40, Brian Burch a écrit :
If you need some help (perhaps QA testing), please let me know.
Thank you for offering your help Brian. Tomcat 7.0.52 is now available
for Debian Wheezy through the backports [1]. Tomcat 8 has been submitted
On 03/03/14 11:16, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 03/03/2014 11:21, Apache Wiki a écrit :
That is because each of these packages distributes the files of Tomcat
in different places on the disk, sets different environment variables,
sets different links from one directory to the other in the
On 7.2.2014 19:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
The proposed Apache Tomcat 8.0.3 release is now available for voting.
...
The proposed 8.0.3 release is:
[ ] Broken - do not release
[ ] Alpha - go ahead and release as 8.0.3 (alpha)
[ ] Beta - go ahead and release as 8.0.3 (beta)
[X] Stable - go ahead
On 02/10/13 09:21, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 01/10/2013 22:56, Konstantin Preißer wrote:
Hi Mark,
-Original Message-
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:39 PM
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: 8.0.x / 7.0.x progress
Pulling together information
On 02/10/13 12:27, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 02/10/2013 12:23, Brian Burch wrote:
On 02/10/13 09:21, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 01/10/2013 22:56, Konstantin Preißer wrote:
Hi Mark,
-Original Message-
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:39 PM
2013/9/3 ma...@apache.org:
Author: markt
Date: Tue Sep 3 19:26:17 2013
New Revision: 1519804
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1519804
Log:
Tomcat only uses package-info.java files for Javadoc so don't bother
creating empty class
files from them.
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/build.xml
1.
On 03/09/13 13:16, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55517
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 20/08/13 14:32, Violeta Georgieva wrote:
2013/8/20 Nick Williams wrote:
I'm working on implementing bugzilla 55317. It's a pretty important
change (weaving) to a pretty import class (WebappClassLoader), so it
obviously needs some unit tests. However, I need some guidance:
1) I've never
On 07/08/13 19:49, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2013/8/7 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
I use netbeans exclusively. I get warnings about import order from almost
every tc source file. Periodically I scratch around looking for the rules
template so I can change them to conform with the ant
On 07/08/13 14:14, Nick Williams wrote:
On Aug 7, 2013, at 2:41 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
For trunk we have been running a policy of zero warnings in the code.
This has helped to highlight issues as code is edited as any warnings
are immediately clear. Obviously, this depends on what warnings
On 07/08/13 09:32, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55372
--- Comment #5 from Michael Osipov 1983-01...@gmx.net ---
(In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #4)
[..]
res/ide-support/netbeans/README.txt. Was that intentional? Though, I do not
know how
On 13/07/13 00:10, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2013/7/12 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
While working on https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55215, I
was surprised to discover my log files generated by AccessLogValve do not
seem to be handled by log4j.
I've worked with the various
While working on
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55215, I was
surprised to discover my log files generated by AccessLogValve do not
seem to be handled by log4j.
I've worked with the various Authenticator Valves and all I could
remember was they used the juli Logger
On 02/07/13 10:18, Mark Thomas wrote:
The proposed Apache Tomcat 7.0.42 release is now available for voting.
It can be obtained from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.42/
The Maven staging repo is:
On 27/06/13 21:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 27/06/2013 19:23, Brian Burch wrote:
So will you deal with it from now on, or would you like me to open
bugs on tc7 and tc8?
Fixed. It would be good if you could confirm the fix is correct.
I checked out the tc7 trunk. The source of JNDIRealm
I eventually got round to integration testing of 7.0.41 yesterday and
was baffled to find I couldn't logon!
To cut a long debugging story short, revision 1491394 has a bug that was
introduced as part of the standardisation of our Base64 handling. I
wasn't sure whether I ought to open a new
On 27/06/13 18:51, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2013/6/27 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
I eventually got round to integration testing of 7.0.41 yesterday and was
baffled to find I couldn't logon!
To cut a long debugging story short, revision 1491394 has a bug that was
introduced as part
Sorry, but I cannot quote the relevant section of the original email
because I had already deleted my copy.
This commit replaces the dependency on junit 4.8.2 with 4.11. It causes
collateral damage to the current version of netbeans support. It is on
my todo list to come up with a less
On 13/06/13 13:44, kkoli...@apache.org wrote:
Author: kkolinko
Date: Thu Jun 13 12:44:30 2013
New Revision: 1492647
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1492647
Log:
Update JUnit version in NetBeans files.
Hamcrest library is now in its own jar.
Modified:
On 13/06/13 13:57, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2013/6/13 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
Sorry, but I cannot quote the relevant section of the original email because
I had already deleted my copy.
This commit replaces the dependency on junit 4.8.2 with 4.11. It causes
collateral damage
I have just registered a wiki name of BrianBurch. Could I please be
given permission to update the tomcat wiki? (I need to bring the page on
NetBeans support up to date with http://svn.apache.org/r1484409)
Thanks,
Brian
-
To
On 20/05/13 21:19, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 20/05/2013 18:32, Brian Burch wrote:
On 20/05/13 12:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
These files appear to be auto-generated based on input you have
provided. The only content I'm concerned about are the comments. Are
they all yours? If so, I'll just remove
On 21/05/13 10:19, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 21/05/2013 09:48, Brian Burch wrote:
With respect to the three XSDs referenced in my project.xml, these urls
all return 404 Not Found status. (I forget how many years ago I first
discovered this).
That will be because they are URIs, not URLs.
If you
On 20/05/13 10:53, ma...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markt
Date: Mon May 20 09:53:25 2013
New Revision: 1484409
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1484409
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54899
Provide an initial implementation of NetBeans support.
Patch provided by Brian
On 20/05/13 12:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 20/05/2013 11:16, Brian Burch wrote:
On 20/05/13 10:53, ma...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markt
Date: Mon May 20 09:53:25 2013
New Revision: 1484409
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1484409
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54899
On 05.05.2013 12:44, Mark Thomas wrote:
The proposed Apache Tomcat 7.0.40 release is now available for voting.
It can be obtained from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.40/
The Maven staging repo is:
On 06/05/13 15:27, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2013/5/6 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
On 05.05.2013 12:44, Mark Thomas wrote:
The proposed Apache Tomcat 7.0.40 release is now available for voting.
It can be obtained from:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.40
On 22/03/13 01:11, Brian Burch wrote:
snip/
I'll keep this enhancement open until I've had time to think properly...
although your new Basic parser has returned to BasicAuthenticator,
there might still be some merit in moving it to HttpParser and keeping
my proposed test suite, especially now
On 20/03/13 10:17, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54729
Sorry I could not reply more quickly, Mark, but I am currently in
Australia and I am probably asleep while you are working.
Judging by the flurry of activity in this area, I conclude my
On 29/11/12 16:11, Brian Burch wrote:
On 29/11/12 14:37, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
Re: [Bug 54190] TestNonLoginAndBasicAuthenticator does not test session
timeout properly
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What
On 04/01/13 19:58, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2013/1/4 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
On 29/11/12 16:11, Brian Burch wrote:
On 29/11/12 14:37, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
Re: [Bug 54190] TestNonLoginAndBasicAuthenticator does
by Brian Burch.
Modified:
tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/ (props changed)
tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/test/org/apache/catalina/authenticator/TestNonLoginAndBasicAuthenticator.java
tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/webapps/docs/changelog.xml
Propchange: tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk
On 03/12/12 11:44, Brian Burch wrote:
On 02/12/12 22:00, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
snip/
According to Buildbot logs, testBasicLoginSessionTimeout() runs for 2
minutes (125 seconds), mainly due to a sleep() call.
I wish there were a way to speed up this test.
My thoughts
a) Maybe use
On 03/12/12 16:22, Brian Burch wrote:
On 03/12/12 11:44, Brian Burch wrote:
On 02/12/12 22:00, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
snip/
According to Buildbot logs, testBasicLoginSessionTimeout() runs for 2
minutes (125 seconds), mainly due to a sleep() call.
I wish there were a way to speed up
On 29/11/12 14:37, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 29/11/12 16:46, Rainer Jung wrote:
On 29.11.2012 17:11, Brian Burch wrote:
On 29/11/12 14:37, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
When I looked quickly at your change, the - and + lines appeared to
be identical to me, so I was puzzled
On 22/11/12 15:17, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
--- Comment #2 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org ---
testBasicLoginWithoutSession() seems to repeat the same pair of tests but the
comments suggest that something different should happen the
On 22/11/12 16:46, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
--- Comment #3 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org ---
Your logic makes sense to me so my preference would be some more comments.
I will think about our discussion and try to improve the
On 22/11/12 18:39, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 22/11/2012 17:32, Brian Burch wrote:
On 22/11/12 16:46, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54190
--- Comment #3 from Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org ---
Your logic makes sense to me so my preference would be some
On 30/09/12 23:46, Brian Burch wrote:
On 30/09/12 21:56, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2012/9/26 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
Thanks for all the help while I was developing the new test case for
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53584. The thread
on the
users mailing list
On 30/09/12 21:56, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2012/9/26 Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com:
Thanks for all the help while I was developing the new test case for
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53584. The thread on the
users mailing list is called AuthenticatorBase
Thanks for all the help while I was developing the new test case for
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53584. The thread on
the users mailing list is called AuthenticatorBase
setChangeSessionIdOnAuthentication without cookies.
I now have two new test cases working
On 07/08/12 22:33, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53584
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 14/08/12 16:58, Mark Thomas wrote:
Brian Burch br...@pingtoo.com wrote:
On 07/08/12 22:33, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53584
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 07/08/12 22:46, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53601
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 25/07/12 12:55, bugzi...@apache.org wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53601
Konstantin Kolinko knst.koli...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
On 25/04/12 12:32, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 25/04/2012 12:03, Brian Burch wrote:
On 24/04/12 21:34, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 24/04/2012 21:11, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 24/04/2012 20:51, Brian Burch wrote:
Sorry I haven't been able to quote the details of this commit made by
markt a month ago, but I
On 24/04/12 21:34, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 24/04/2012 21:11, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 24/04/2012 20:51, Brian Burch wrote:
Sorry I haven't been able to quote the details of this commit made by
markt a month ago, but I didn't keep a copy in my inbox.
I previously submitted an enhancement
Sorry I haven't been able to quote the details of this commit made by
markt a month ago, but I didn't keep a copy in my inbox.
I previously submitted an enhancement to the corresponding test suite
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53096
I fully expected all my test cases would
On 21/03/12 10:00, ma...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markt
Date: Wed Mar 21 10:00:52 2012
New Revision: 1303338
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1303338view=rev
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52953
When using DIGEST auth, digests are always represented using
On 05/03/12 18:45, ma...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markt
Date: Mon Mar 5 18:45:27 2012
New Revision: 1297158
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1297158view=rev
Log:
Fix some test failures now response bodies are available for error
responses.
Modified:
On 06/03/12 14:58, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2012/3/6 Brian Burchbr...@pingtoo.com:
However, this new version of my test is failing in a peculiar manner and I
am currently investigating the problem.
I will make any further comments on the original thread New unit tests for
Authenticators and
I have finished the third in my series of new unit tests, which examines
the SingleSignOn interactions between the Digest and NonLogin
Authenticators. Because each Authenticator class has its own SSO logic,
I feel it is sensible to test that logic explicitly. However, there is
no need to
I have now finished the second in my set of new unit test classes. This
one examines the SingleSignOn interactions between the NonLogin and
Basic Authenticators.
It is consistent with the various changes made to my previously
submitted test class,
On 18/01/12 08:26, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 1/13/2012 8:30 PM, Brian Burch wrote:
On 14/01/12 09:45, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
No grudge held :)
I'm just bringing it up since very many files have been reformatted for
the sake of formatting. And when tracing down a problem, I, and I
On 19/01/12 07:12, Christopher Schultz wrote:
All,
I was testing 7.0.25 and ant test reports BUILD SUCCESSFUL but I
started looking at the TEST-*.txt files that are emitted and I was
wondering about a few things.
First, I should probably be look at the bottom of the file for the junit
summary
When using netbeans as an ide, it will always create a subdirectory
called nbproject inside the project root directory. That means svn
status will show this local directory as ? (not under version control).
There are no circumstances where someone should be allowed to commit the
nbproject
been accidentally triggered.
*
* @author Brian Burch
*/
public class TestNonLoginAndBasicAuthenticator extends TomcatBaseTest {
private static final String USER = user;
private static final String PWD = pwd;
private static final String ROLE = role;
private static final String
On 15/01/12 04:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 14/01/2012 08:24, Brian Burch wrote:
I realise everyone will be busy on the 7.0.24 release, so don't let this
distract you - it isn't urgent.
I had to fix a failing unit test so it was no bother.
Thanks very much, Mark.
I've added this to trunk
On 15/01/12 04:24, ma...@apache.org wrote:
Author: markt
Date: Sat Jan 14 18:24:27 2012
New Revision: 1231550
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1231550view=rev
Log:
Fix warnings
Curious... I don't get any compiler warnings and checkstyle said it was
OK. I presume your compiler didn't
On 14/01/12 09:45, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
No grudge held :)
I'm just bringing it up since very many files have been reformatted for
the sake of formatting. And when tracing down a problem, I, and I
suspect others too, often use SVN history to figure out what and how
changed. So a
On 10/01/12 13:21, Brian Burch wrote:
Konstantin,
Thank you for your prompt and helpful response... at least I know I
haven't overlooked something simple. With your encouragement, I'm happy
to keep fighting the alligators until I can get back to draining the
swamp!
I am working on this issue
On 06/01/12 11:47, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2012/1/6 Brian Burchbr...@pingtoo.com:
I am developing some new unit tests to validate SingleSignOn and
Authenticator logic. I have used this existing test class as my template:
org.apache.catalina.authenticator.TestDigestAuthenticator
.. which
Konstantin,
Thank you for your prompt and helpful response... at least I know I
haven't overlooked something simple. With your encouragement, I'm happy
to keep fighting the alligators until I can get back to draining the
swamp!
On 10/01/12 02:56, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2012/1/9 Brian
I am developing some new unit tests to validate SingleSignOn and
Authenticator logic. I have used this existing test class as my template:
org.apache.catalina.authenticator.TestDigestAuthenticator
.. which extends org.apache.catalina.startup.TomcatBaseTest.
I noticed that
On 28/12/11 22:27, Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
Thanks very much for your time and valuable thoughts, Konstantin.
2011/12/28 Brian Burchbr...@pingtoo.com:
snip/
However, I was a bit surprised to discover I couldn't simply wire up
netbeans to compile, run and debug any of the tomcat unit tests!
When I submitted a bug and fix recently, I promised to develop some unit
tests to demonstrate the behaviour of my change.
I don't want to get into a *#!ing contest here, but I switched away
from eclipse a long time ago, when IBM threw in the towel over not
having a pure java workbench. Having
On 29/12/11 02:30, Mark Thomas wrote:
Given we see almost as many spam changes as valid ones, is it time for this:
http://wiki.apache.org/general/OurWikiFarm#per_wiki_access_control_-_tighten_your_wiki_just_a_little.2C_benefit_just_a_lot
I already expected to ask for permission before making
On 28/12/11 23:18, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 28/12/2011 10:49, Brian Burch wrote:
So... can I submit a patch for these three changes to build.xml? I am
sure this will make some of you nervous, but it seems the cleanest
approach to me.
I have no issues with tweaking build.xml if it makes
On 28/12/11 14:40, Bill Barker wrote:
To whom it may engage...
This caught my attention, but I am puzzled (see details below).
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at
On 29/12/11 15:50, Bill Barker wrote:
Thanks for looking at the two errors for me, Bill. It was hard to see
your comments because the formatting of your reply appeared mangled when
I received it. I have snipped out everything except the important bits
below...
Brian Burch wrote
72 matches
Mail list logo
