Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 63444 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2007 12:16:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Mar 2007 12:16:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 41084 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2007 12:16:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 41058 invoked by uid 500); 2 Mar 2007 12:16:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 41046 invoked by uid 99); 2 Mar 2007 12:16:34 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 04:16:34 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [212.27.42.36] (HELO smtp6-g19.free.fr) (212.27.42.36) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 04:16:22 -0800 Received: from [192.168.0.11] (gou06-1-82-224-99-120.fbx.proxad.net [82.224.99.120]) by smtp6-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4AFE7FC5 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:16:01 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <45E81580.7040203@apache.org> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:16:00 +0100 From: Remy Maucherat User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: svn commit: r513601 - in /tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk: java/org/apache/catalina/core/StandardContext.java webapps/docs/changelog.xml References: <20070302023827.6C3AF1A981D@eris.apache.org> <45E7F40A.4080704@apache.org> <45E80E44.60004@joedog.org> In-Reply-To: <45E80E44.60004@joedog.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Tim Funk wrote: > So an older version of the spec had 0 special case where zero meant load > on startup - but don't care when. (Since zero is not a positive > integer). That special case disappeared starting in spec version 2.3. So it's probably because of this that this code was present. I don't know if there's a test about this in the TCK. Rémy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org