If you can send your app-id (privately if you want), we'll see if we can
investigate some on our end.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Marc Guillemot wrote:
>
> Hi Toby,
>
> thanks for the quick answer. I'll open an issue if I'm able to make the
> problem reproducible.
>
> Cheers,
> Marc.
>
> To
Hi Toby,
thanks for the quick answer. I'll open an issue if I'm able to make the
problem reproducible.
Cheers,
Marc.
Toby Reyelts a écrit :
> Hey Marc,
>
> We're not aware of this being a problem. As far as we know, we're
> conforming to the standard by preferring classes in WEB-INF/lib. Can
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Toby Reyelts wrote:
> Hey Marc,
> We're not aware of this being a problem. As far as we know, we're
> conforming to the standard by preferring classes in WEB-INF/lib.
>
Sorry, that should be "preferring classes in WEB-INF/classes".
> Can you reproduce this def
Hey Marc,
We're not aware of this being a problem. As far as we know, we're conforming
to the standard by preferring classes in WEB-INF/lib. Can you reproduce this
definitively? For example, check the value of
TheHtmlUnitClassThatYouAreShadowing.class.getCodeSource().getProtectionDomain().getLocati
