geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Geronimo Server 2.1 and Geronimo TxManager 2.1.1 Releases
Date Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:43:27 GMT

On Feb 15, 2008, at 12:18 PM, David Jencks wrote:

>
> On Feb 15, 2008, at 9:07 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com 
>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 15, 2008, at 10:12 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote:
>>>> Looks like I sent this to the wrong thread:
>>>>
>>>> This is about: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3855
>>>>
>>>> Hmm this seems bad. I was able to reproduce the problem on port  
>>>> 8443
>>>> only but _all_ portlets failed in this way. So the console is  
>>>> pretty
>>>> much unusable on port 8443. Can somebody else verify these  
>>>> findings?
>>>>
>>>> Yep. Looks like a bug. Don't see this as a security exposure. So,  
>>>> not sure
>>>> why you want to discuss here.
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-3855 would seem  
>>>> like the
>>>> appropriate location to work on getting this fixed. Do you  
>>>> disagree?
>>>
>>> But, IMHO, this is not just a bug it is a major bug where one of the
>>> important pieces of Geronimo functionality is simply not working on
>>> port 8443. Personally, I would have voted -1 on the release if I
>>> realized the full scope of this bug sooner. But maybe that's just  
>>> me..
>>> so I would like to know what other people think about this  
>>> problem. If
>>> it's just me, that's fine. If not, maybe we should consider
>>> withdrawing the release. Although the admin console is working  
>>> fine on
>>> port 8080 and maybe that's good enough.
>>
>> Sounds like a 2.1.1 fix to me. Will look to hear from others...
>
> I'm OK with fixing this in 2.1.1.  Did this work in 2.0.2?  Can  
> anyone see a way to run our console-testsuite twice, on http:8080  
> and https:8443?

I did test and confirm that this was working on 2.0.2.

Been wondering the same thing. Would definitely be good, to get  
testing on both ports. Good chance that this has been a problem since  
we switched to the new version of Pluto...

>
> I think it would also be good if we could provide a runtime  
> configuration option so the console could only be accessed with https:8443 
>  and possibly on a specific host or virtual host.  I'm not sure how  
> to do this without changing the web.xml however.

Agreed.

--kevan
Mime
View raw message