Looks like you need to open a ticket for that :P
On Oct 8, 3:50 am, Timothy Perrett wrote:
> My point exactly!
>
> To that end, why dont we just add a small matching statement or switch
> that allows using Jetty 7 - only the package structure has changed not
> the continuation API itself so
My point exactly!
To that end, why dont we just add a small matching statement or switch
that allows using Jetty 7 - only the package structure has changed not
the continuation API itself so it should be fairly trivial. The jetty-
runner stuff would really get me out of jetty-wrapper-hell th
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Timothy Perrett wrote:
>
> I know that has been the plan - but I cant help but think that Servlet
> 3.0 is still a long way off standardisation?
>
It's been 3 months away from being a standard for almost 2 years. ;-)
>
> What do you think?
>
> Cheers, Tim
>
>
> O
I know that has been the plan - but I cant help but think that Servlet
3.0 is still a long way off standardisation?
What do you think?
Cheers, Tim
On 7 Oct 2009, at 16:53, David Pollak wrote:
> I was hoping to generically support Servlet 3.0 continuations (which
> should work for Jetty 7
I was hoping to generically support Servlet 3.0 continuations (which should
work for Jetty 7 and Glassfish). Please open a ticket for it.
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Timothy Perrett wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> I just wanted to rename this thread and raise this for proper
> discussion. API's between
