Re: Tagging the September releases and 11.0.x stability

On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 4:00 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm just wrapping up the fix for BZ 69302. Once that is committed, I > expect to tag 11.0.0-M25. > > I also think we need to start thinking about declaring 11.0.x stable. > The specs are implemented, the TCKs are passing, 11.0.x is

Re: Tagging 11.0.x

On 2024/07/02 09:17:49 Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > The tests currently pass and there are just a couple of PRs still to > review so, barring any unexpected problems, I should be tagging 11.0.x > later today. Before going over to tagging, can you assess the following situation: https://lis

Re: Tagging June releases

Mark, On 6/13/24 07:42, Mark Thomas wrote: Just to confirm, I intend to tag 11.0.x tomorrow and that I intend the next 11.0.x release to be a BETA release. That does beg the question how long until we have a stable release. Given the similarity between 11.0.x and 10.1.x I don't think we need

Re: Tagging June releases

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:43 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Just to confirm, I intend to tag 11.0.x tomorrow and that I intend the > next 11.0.x release to be a BETA release. > > That does beg the question how long until we have a stable release. > Given the similarity between 11.0.x and 10.1.x I don't

Re: Tagging June releases

Just to confirm, I intend to tag 11.0.x tomorrow and that I intend the next 11.0.x release to be a BETA release. That does beg the question how long until we have a stable release. Given the similarity between 11.0.x and 10.1.x I don't think we need to wait very long. Thoughts? Mark On 11/

Re: Tagging June releases

Mark, On 6/10/24 04:06, Mark Thomas wrote: A bunch of minor issues built up in my TODO list while I was at Community over Code and the Tomcat security day. I'd like to clear these before I tag the June releases. +1 In related news, the release ballots for Servlet and Pages have completed su

Re: Tagging May releases

On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 7:26 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > Things are looking good for the May releases. I have a few things to > back-port to 10.1.x and 9.0.x and then I'll start running my pre-release > tests. Providing everything passes (and CI runs suggest they will) I'll > tag 11.0.x -

Re: Tagging and code signing

Mark and Rémy, On 11/9/23 04:07, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 10:00 AM Mark Thomas wrote: On 08/11/2023 21:07, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 11/8/23 12:58, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, I have a few things I still want to look at with the recent error handling changes.

Re: Tagging and code signing

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 10:00 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 08/11/2023 21:07, Christopher Schultz wrote: > > Mark, > > > > On 11/8/23 12:58, Mark Thomas wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I have a few things I still want to look at with the recent error > >> handling changes. I'm seeing differences in be

Re: Tagging and code signing

On 08/11/2023 21:07, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 11/8/23 12:58, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, I have a few things I still want to look at with the recent error handling changes. I'm seeing differences in behaviour between versions I at least want to understand. Depending on what I find,

Re: Tagging and code signing

Mark, On 11/8/23 12:58, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, I have a few things I still want to look at with the recent error handling changes. I'm seeing differences in behaviour between versions I at least want to understand. Depending on what I find, I might try and align behaviours a little more.

Re: Re-tagging

On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:35 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > 11 Oct 2023 07:04:56 Rémy Maucherat : > > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:00 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Given the compression regression, how quickly do we want to re-tag? I > >> should be available to do 11.0.x pretty muc

Re: Re-tagging

11 Oct 2023 07:04:56 Rémy Maucherat : On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:00 PM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Given the compression regression, how quickly do we want to re-tag? I should be available to do 11.0.x pretty much whenever. I can help out with other brnaches as well if required. +1 and I am

Re: Re-tagging

> On Oct 11, 2023, at 17:58, Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > Given the compression regression, how quickly do we want to re-tag? I should > be available to do 11.0.x pretty much whenever. I can help out with other > brnaches as well if required. +1, I can wait to test and vote for new

Re: Re-tagging

On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:00 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > Given the compression regression, how quickly do we want to re-tag? I > should be available to do 11.0.x pretty much whenever. I can help out > with other brnaches as well if required. +1 and I am available (in a couple hours).

Re-tagging

Hi all, Given the compression regression, how quickly do we want to re-tag? I should be available to do 11.0.x pretty much whenever. I can help out with other brnaches as well if required. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-

Re: Tagging mod_jk

On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 10:05 AM Rainer Jung wrote: > Should have gone to the list. > > I think the mod_jk build process does not make it available online like > the Tomcat one does, but here's the current section: > > > Changes between 1.2.48 and 1.2.49 > > > Apache > > * Update:

Re: Tagging mod_jk

Should have gone to the list. I think the mod_jk build process does not make it available online like the Tomcat one does, but here's the current section: Changes between 1.2.48 and 1.2.49 Apache * Update: Retrieve default request id from mod_unique_id. It can also be taken

Re: Tagging mod_jk

Hi Mark, is there a Changelog available? Thanks Martin On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:29 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > After a long period of inactivity we have had some bug fixes for mod_jk > so I am planning a Tomcat Connectors tag shortly. > > I need to run through my pre-tag checks and I'

Re: Tagging 10.1.x and 8.5.x

Mark, On 5/9/23 08:45, Mark Thomas wrote: Have you had any thoughts on timing for the May tags? I could do them this month if that helps. Working on them today. I've been pretty busy and I botched the build... twice already. -chris --

Re: Tagging 11.0.0-M1

On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 9:42 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > Just a heads up that, barring any last minute surprises, I intend to tag > 11.0.0-M1 tomorrow. +1 I thought there was not much, but actually there's the packaging bug 66348. Rémy > Mark > > --

Re: Tagging 8.5.x

On 23/02/2022 16:17, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 2/23/22 10:07, Mark Thomas wrote: The February release round is running rather late. Therefore, I'd like to get 8.5.x tagged and the RC uploaded today. Unless there are objections I'm intending to start this in ~3 hours time. I can

Re: Tagging 8.5.x

Mark, On 2/23/22 10:07, Mark Thomas wrote: The February release round is running rather late. Therefore, I'd like to get 8.5.x tagged and the RC uploaded today. Unless there are objections I'm intending to start this in ~3 hours time. I can get started on it, now. -chris ---

Re: Tagging 8.5.x

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 4:07 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > The February release round is running rather late. Therefore, I'd like > to get 8.5.x tagged and the RC uploaded today. Unless there are > objections I'm intending to start this in ~3 hours time. +1 > On a related topic, DigiCert

Re: Tagging 10.1.x and 10.0.x tomorrow

Hi all, That took rather longer than I expected. I'm currently running my final tests and expect to tag later this morning. Mark On 10/02/2022 12:05, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 1:18 PM Mark Thomas wrote: On 07/02/2022 21:06, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Just a heads up t

Re: Tagging 10.1.x and 10.0.x tomorrow

On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 1:18 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 07/02/2022 21:06, Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Just a heads up that, barring surprises, I plan to be in a position to > > tag 10.1.x and 10.0.x for the February release round towards the end of > > tomorrow. > > There were surprise

Re: Tagging 10.1.x and 10.0.x tomorrow

On 07/02/2022 21:06, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Just a heads up that, barring surprises, I plan to be in a position to tag 10.1.x and 10.0.x for the February release round towards the end of tomorrow. There were surprises. Looking more like the end of the week at the moment. Mark -

Re: Tagging 10.1.x & 10.0.x

On 01/12/2021 10:03, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 10:42 AM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It is the start of a new month so I am intending to tag 10.1.x and 10.0.x shortly. I do have a slight concern that the DigiCert code signing renewal either isn't complete or hasn't been proc

Re: Tagging 10.1.x & 10.0.x

On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 10:42 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > It is the start of a new month so I am intending to tag 10.1.x and > 10.0.x shortly. > > I do have a slight concern that the DigiCert code signing renewal either > isn't complete or hasn't been processed fully as there is one locat

Re: Tagging 10.1.0-M5 etc

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:02 PM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Things are looking good for the September release. We do need the Tomcat Native 1.2.31 vote to complete first (thanks for your vote Rémy). If you have time to test with 1.2.31 your vote would be really helpful as we only have 2 votes s

Re: Tagging 10.1.0-M5 etc

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 31/08/2021 21:44, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:02 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Things are looking good for the September release. We do need the Tomcat > >> Native 1.2.31 vote to complete first (

Re: Tagging 10.1.0-M5 etc

On 31/08/2021 21:44, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:02 PM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Things are looking good for the September release. We do need the Tomcat Native 1.2.31 vote to complete first (thanks for your vote Rémy). If you have time to test with 1.2.31 your vote would

Re: Tagging 10.1.0-M5 etc

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:02 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > Things are looking good for the September release. We do need the Tomcat > Native 1.2.31 vote to complete first (thanks for your vote Rémy). If you > have time to test with 1.2.31 your vote would be really helpful as we > only have

Re: Tagging next release

On 27/07/2021 04:17, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 7/23/21 09:40, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Partly due to the couple of regressions that have emerged this month, I'd like to aim to get the next set of releases out closer to the start of August than the middle. With that in mind I'll

Re: Tagging next release

Mark, On 7/23/21 09:40, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, Partly due to the couple of regressions that have emerged this month, I'd like to aim to get the next set of releases out closer to the start of August than the middle. With that in mind I'll be starting release prep shortly with a view to

Re: Tagging next release

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:41 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > Partly due to the couple of regressions that have emerged this month, > I'd like to aim to get the next set of releases out closer to the start > of August than the middle. > > With that in mind I'll be starting release prep shortl

Re: Tagging 10.1.0-M2 & 10.0.8

Mark, Rémy, On 6/25/21 06:09, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 6:34 PM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, My current plan is: - fix bz 65377 - check the tests pass locally - tag Hopefully, this will mean tagging some time tomorrow which means a release around 30 June / 1 July. Of cou

Re: Tagging 10.1.0-M2 & 10.0.8

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 6:34 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi all, > > My current plan is: > > - fix bz 65377 > - check the tests pass locally > - tag > > Hopefully, this will mean tagging some time tomorrow which means a > release around 30 June / 1 July. > > Of course, the mere act of sending this e

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 10/06/2021 10:40, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 2021-06-10 08:30, Mark Thomas a écrit : Except that it doesn't work. The version of JSign we are using requires Java 8. I'm planning on looking into possible options this morning. One option is to roll-back to the previous Windows only way of doing

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

Le 2021-06-10 08:30, Mark Thomas a écrit : Except that it doesn't work. The version of JSign we are using requires Java 8. I'm planning on looking into possible options this morning. One option is to roll-back to the previous Windows only way of doing a release. Let me know if there is any i

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 09/06/2021 23:29, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/9/21 18:25, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/9/21 13:14, Mark Thomas wrote: On 09/06/2021 17:58, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/4/21 13:09, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a littl

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 09/06/2021 23:25, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/9/21 13:14, Mark Thomas wrote: On 09/06/2021 17:58, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/4/21 13:09, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I can up

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

Mark, On 6/9/21 18:25, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/9/21 13:14, Mark Thomas wrote: On 09/06/2021 17:58, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/4/21 13:09, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I can

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

Mark, On 6/9/21 13:14, Mark Thomas wrote: On 09/06/2021 17:58, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/4/21 13:09, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I can update the release branches to use the new release

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 09/06/2021 17:58, Christopher Schultz wrote: Mark, On 6/4/21 13:09, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I can update the release branches to use the new release. I also still have a few odds and ends I wa

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

Mark, On 6/4/21 13:09, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I can update the release branches to use the new release. I also still have a few odds and ends I want to finish off before tagging so it is looking

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 08/06/2021 12:22, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 8:14 PM Mark Thomas wrote: On 04/06/2021 18:35, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:09 PM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 8:14 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 04/06/2021 18:35, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:09 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for > >> 1.2.30 to replicate before I can update the rele

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 04/06/2021 18:35, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:09 PM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for 1.2.30 to replicate before I can update the release branches to use the new release. I also still have a few odds and ends I

Re: Tagging 10.1.x, 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:09 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > It looks like the mirrors are going to need a little more time for > 1.2.30 to replicate before I can update the release branches to use the > new release. I also still have a few odds and ends I want to finish off > before tagging s

Re: Tagging May releases towards the end of this week

On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 12:55 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 04/05/2021 08:43, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:36 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > > >> On 04/05/2021 08:29, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > >>> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:26 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > >>> > Hi all, > > It

Re: Tagging May releases towards the end of this week

On 04/05/2021 08:43, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:36 AM Mark Thomas wrote: On 04/05/2021 08:29, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:26 AM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It is the start of a new month so time to tag and release. I have a few things I'd like to get

Re: Tagging May releases towards the end of this week

On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:36 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 04/05/2021 08:29, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:26 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> It is the start of a new month so time to tag and release. I have a few > >> things I'd like to get fixed first: > >> >

Re: Tagging May releases towards the end of this week

On 04/05/2021 08:29, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:26 AM Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, It is the start of a new month so time to tag and release. I have a few things I'd like to get fixed first: 1. BZ 65272 (allow CR as HTTP line separator). I'm planning on applying PR 417

Re: Tagging May releases towards the end of this week

On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 9:26 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > It is the start of a new month so time to tag and release. I have a few > things I'd like to get fixed first: > > 1. BZ 65272 (allow CR as HTTP line separator). > I'm planning on applying PR 417 to address this before I tag unles

Re: Tagging 10.0.x (and 9.0.x, 8.5.x)

On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 12:47 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > It is the beginning of the month so it is release time again. > > I am currently working on a fix for some async error handling bugs > reported via Spring WebFlux: > https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-framework/issues/26434 >

Re: Tagging 10.0.x, 9.0.x, 8.5.x

On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:27 PM Violeta Georgieva wrote: > > > На ср, 4.03.2020 г. в 14:25 Martin Tzvetanov Grigorov < > mgrigo...@apache.org> написа: > > > > The SCI regression seems to affect some users of 7.0.x. And staying with > 7.0.99 is not a good option because of CVE-2020-1938. > > > > @V

Re: Tagging 10.0.x, 9.0.x, 8.5.x

На ср, 4.03.2020 г. в 14:25 Martin Tzvetanov Grigorov написа: > > The SCI regression seems to affect some users of 7.0.x. And staying with 7.0.99 is not a good option because of CVE-2020-1938. > > @Violeta: will you have time to cut 7.0.101 after the new releases of 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x ? Yep

Re: Tagging 10.0.x, 9.0.x, 8.5.x

The SCI regression seems to affect some users of 7.0.x. And staying with 7.0.99 is not a good option because of CVE-2020-1938. @Violeta: will you have time to cut 7.0.101 after the new releases of 10.0.x, 9.0.x and 8.5.x ? Martin On 2020/02/28 20:30:50, Mark Thomas wrote: > Just a heads up t

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:40 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > http://people.apache.org/~markt/patches/2019-06-03-h2-v1.patch I'm testing extensively, and this patch http://people.apache.org/~markt/patches/2019-06-03-h2-v2.patch looks good to me. Rémy

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:40 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/06/2019 22:29, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > > How about this as an idea: > > > > --- a/java/org/apache/coyote/AbstractProtocol.java > > +++ b/java/org/apache/coyote/AbstractProtocol.java > > @@ -905,6 +905,10 @@ > >

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 03/06/2019 22:29, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > How about this as an idea: > > --- a/java/org/apache/coyote/AbstractProtocol.java > +++ b/java/org/apache/coyote/AbstractProtocol.java > @@ -905,6 +905,10 @@ >                                  } >                              }

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:06 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/06/2019 21:45, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:05 PM Mark Thomas > > wrote: > > > > On 03/06/2019 19:54, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > > > > > > > > Ok, that's completely different ;)

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 03/06/2019 21:45, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:05 PM Mark Thomas > wrote: > > On 03/06/2019 19:54, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > > > > Ok, that's completely different ;) I tried to be careful with > that, but > > the algorithm ch

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:05 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/06/2019 19:54, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > > > > Ok, that's completely different ;) I tried to be careful with that, but > > the algorithm changes to non blocking, so obviously there were some > > risks involved. I'll have a quick look at

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 03/06/2019 19:54, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > Ok, that's completely different ;) I tried to be careful with that, but > the algorithm changes to non blocking, so obviously there were some > risks involved. I'll have a quick look at it, but you can go ahead with > your window update fix and tag, t

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:36 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/06/2019 16:43, Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 03/06/2019 14:15, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > > > >> I think I have found at least one more edge case around the > >> Stream/Connection allocation handling. Fixing it is going to mean > going

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 03/06/2019 16:43, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/06/2019 14:15, Rémy Maucherat wrote: >> I think I have found at least one more edge case around the >> Stream/Connection allocation handling. Fixing it is going to mean going >> back to a synchronizing on a single object (Stream) so the

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 03/06/2019 14:15, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:21 PM Mark Thomas > wrote: > > Hi, > > It is the start of another month so I intend to tag 9.0.x and 8.5.x > shortly. Or at least I did until I found a handful of HTTP/2 related > failu

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:21 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi, > > It is the start of another month so I intend to tag 9.0.x and 8.5.x > shortly. Or at least I did until I found a handful of HTTP/2 related > failures when I ran the unit tests on Windows for 9.0.x. > Bad news :( I haven't run into it. +

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 11:23 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi, > > Just a heads up that I'm intended to tag these soon. Possibly tomorrow > but certainly by the end of the week. I just have a few things I want to > look at first. > Should I leave the async IO code enabled, or should it remain disabled

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

Hi Mark, Thanks for the heads up! I'd like to fill in some missing Korean translations (~ 10 new items), and push the exported strings in the master branch tonight. Cheers, Woonsan On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:23 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > Hi, > > Just a heads up that I'm intended to tag these soon

Re: Tagging 9.0.18

On 10/04/2019 22:31, Rainer Jung wrote: > Am 09.04.2019 um 19:45 schrieb Mark Thomas: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm a bit behind again this month - mainly because I was at the http >> workshop last week (very useful - a write-up is on the way). > > I'm very keen on reading your notes. On the httpd dev list

Re: Tagging 9.0.18

Am 09.04.2019 um 19:45 schrieb Mark Thomas: Hi all, I'm a bit behind again this month - mainly because I was at the http workshop last week (very useful - a write-up is on the way). I'm very keen on reading your notes. On the httpd dev list Bill mentioned three links to notes taken by Daniel

Re: Tagging 9.0.18

On 09/04/2019 19:08, Violeta Georgieva wrote: > На вт, 9.04.2019 г. в 20:45 ч. Mark Thomas написа: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm a bit behind again this month - mainly because I was at the http >> workshop last week (very useful - a write-up is on the way). I've been >> through the open bugs and resolve

Re: Tagging 9.0.18

На вт, 9.04.2019 г. в 20:45 ч. Mark Thomas написа: > > Hi all, > > I'm a bit behind again this month - mainly because I was at the http > workshop last week (very useful - a write-up is on the way). I've been > through the open bugs and resolved those that don't require more > research / 3rd party

Re: Tagging Tomcat releases with Git

week so I guess we'll find out then. > > > I have never done (c). I usually push a branch with a "with tags" > > flag, so both a branch and tags are pushed. Technically, it is > > possible to push branch with tags and delete the branch from the > > remote

Re: Tagging Tomcat releases with Git

e to push branch with tags and delete the branch from the > remote repository later. > > 2) Sometimes a release manager does re-tagging. > > It needs testing whether we have the rights to delete a tag, and how > those deletions are replicated between repositories. Tags are not protecte

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

On 29/11/2018 23:39, Christopher Schultz wrote: > Mark, > > On 11/29/18 16:29, Mark Thomas wrote: >> I think the issues are resolved now so I plan to review the >> current state of the code and then tag either later today or early >> tomorrow. > > +1 I've just realised that we aren't including t

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Mark, On 11/29/18 16:29, Mark Thomas wrote: > I think the issues are resolved now so I plan to review the > current state of the code and then tag either later today or early > tomorrow. +1 - -chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Using Gnu

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

I think the issues are resolved now so I plan to review the current state of the code and then tag either later today or early tomorrow. Mark - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

Another update: - APR connector works well - It looks like it has to do with readFromSSL() after the handshake returning 0 bytes. I remember having added some native code to mod_ssl for OpenSSL 1.1.1, which handles new behavior in OpenSSL SSL_read(). It can now return 0 and set the ssl erro

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

One correction: using openssl s_client correctly does not hang. Only curl build with OpenSSL hangs. I tried my old curl builds and it seems it starts to hang with curl 7.24.0. Version 7.23.1 does not hang. The OpenSSL lib version on the client side does not seem to matter. I'll do some more d

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

Short addition: When using Apache httpd 2.4.37 build with OpenSSL 1.1.1a, there are no hangs with TLS 1.0. So it seems we have a relevant difference in our server-side use of the OpenSSL API. Easy to reproduce, but not easy to debug ... Regards, Rainer Am 23.11.2018 um 15:50 schrieb Rainer J

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

Am 23.11.2018 um 14:54 schrieb Mark Thomas: Hi all, Given bugs 62662 and 62944, I plan to tag 1.2.19 early next week with a view to including 1.2.19 in the next round of Tomcat releases. I observed a problem with TLS 1.0 under the following conditions: - using 9.0.13 with NIO plus tcnative 1

Re: Tagging Tomcat Native 1.2.19

On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 2:54 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > Given bugs 62662 and 62944, I plan to tag 1.2.19 early next week with a > view to including 1.2.19 in the next round of Tomcat releases. > +1 Rémy

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On 03/09/18 16:13, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/09/18 14:47, Rémy Maucherat wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:53 PM Mark Thomas wrote: >> >>> On 03/09/18 11:40, Rémy Maucherat wrote: On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:19 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > As the start of September i

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On 03/09/18 17:30, Eric Lilja wrote: > On 2018-09-03 12:19, Mark Thomas wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As the start of September is here I'm planning to tag 9.0.x (and 8.5.x) >> shortly and roll the next monthly release. >> > > Hi! Will there be a new release of tomcat native to go with 9.0.x? There is

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On 2018-09-03 12:19, Mark Thomas wrote: Hi all, As the start of September is here I'm planning to tag 9.0.x (and 8.5.x) shortly and roll the next monthly release. Hi! Will there be a new release of tomcat native to go with 9.0.x? - Eric L

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On 03/09/18 14:47, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:53 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > >> On 03/09/18 11:40, Rémy Maucherat wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:19 PM Mark Thomas wrote: >>> Hi all, As the start of September is here I'm planning to tag 9.0.x (and 8.5.x) >>

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:53 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > On 03/09/18 11:40, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:19 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> As the start of September is here I'm planning to tag 9.0.x (and 8.5.x) > >> shortly and roll the next monthly release.

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On 03/09/18 11:40, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:19 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> As the start of September is here I'm planning to tag 9.0.x (and 8.5.x) >> shortly and roll the next monthly release. >> >> I've a couple of things I want to look at first so I'll prob

Re: Tagging 9.0.x

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 12:19 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > As the start of September is here I'm planning to tag 9.0.x (and 8.5.x) > shortly and roll the next monthly release. > > I've a couple of things I want to look at first so I'll probably be > tagging in the next day or two. > > What

Re: Tagging tc-native 1.2.17

On 06/06/18 14:39, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 06/06/18 13:03, jean-frederic clere wrote: >> Hi >> >> I have been fixed a few issues in tomcat-native trunk, I would like to >> tag and "release". >> >> updating openssl and apr to their latest version is also planed for 1.2.17 >> >> Any objections? > >

Re: Tagging tc-native 1.2.17

On 06/06/18 14:05, Rainer Jung wrote: > Did you notice my reply to your r1832987? Oops fixed thanks. Jean-Frederic - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apac

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On 31/05/18 15:14, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:20 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> June is almost upon us so I'm thinking about the next release round. >> >> I've got a couple of small tasks on my personal TODO list and there are >> one or two BZ issues that could be

Re: Tagging tc-native 1.2.17

On 06/06/18 13:03, jean-frederic clere wrote: > Hi > > I have been fixed a few issues in tomcat-native trunk, I would like to > tag and "release". > > updating openssl and apr to their latest version is also planed for 1.2.17 > > Any objections? None. Let me know if I can help. > I have looked

Re: Tagging tc-native 1.2.17

Did you notice my reply to your r1832987? Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:20 PM Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi all, > > June is almost upon us so I'm thinking about the next release round. > > I've got a couple of small tasks on my personal TODO list and there are > one or two BZ issues that could be resolved. I plan to complete these > tasks and the

Re: Tagging 9.0.x and 8.5.x

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > As we have just passed the start of the month I plan to fix any open > bugs and then tag with a view to releasing end of this week / early next. > +1 On the BZ front, it looks pretty good. Rémy

  1   2   3   4   >