Although I donīt have the answer, itīs a VERY interesting question. As you said, it appeared that mod_webapp would eventually replace mod_jk which has been said to become deprectated at some stage (correct me if I got the information wrong).
So why is there a new version of mod_jk? Unfortunately after visiting the jakarta site Iīm none the wiser :-). bye Michael Delamere ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simon Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:23 PM Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:04:17AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote: > > > > Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13? > > > > And what about mod_webapp? > > > > > > I take it that this is mod_jk and mod_jk2? IME, mod_jk and Apache 2 > > > don't get along well at all[1]. The impression that I've gleaned from > > > reading past postings to this list is that mod_webapp is meant to > > > supercede mod_jk and is the preferred way of connecting Apache and > > > Tomcat. > > > > > > > If mod_webapp is the next generation then why jk2? > > That question can be read in two ways: "Why did I start off using > jk2?" and "why is there a jk2 project, then?" > > To answer the first question: because at the time, I hadn't done much > reading around the subject, and mod_jk was what the other admins that > I spoke to were using, albeit with apache 1.3.x > > The answer to the second interpretation is probably the same :) Also, > jk offers some features that webapp doesn't, which may be an incentive > for people to want to try and make it work with apache 2. > > > Is warp in the coyote connectors the mod_webapp that should be used??? > > Good question. The connector that makes use of it is mod_webapp, and > this is part of the jakarta-tomcat-connectors project, if that helps? > Getting a listing of the classes that are contained in the > "tomcat-*.jar" files doesn't indicate anything called "*warp*", but > that could just be because it's the protocol name.... > > Cheers, > > Simon > > -- > Hanlon's Razor: > Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained > by stupidity. > > -- > To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
