Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 77321 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2007 14:20:20 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Jun 2007 14:20:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 42806 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2007 14:20:20 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 42577 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2007 14:20:20 -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 42566 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2007 14:20:20 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:20:20 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of paulmcmahan@gmail.com designates 66.249.82.229 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.82.229] (HELO wx-out-0506.google.com) (66.249.82.229) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:20:15 -0700 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id t16so543264wxc for ; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:19:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=gZ5q+A4iErClMnXuYZkXUWXNNnvX2YNiGxOgT7c6CBFBaZDHLb83kefWTru8BckBP+QLiNjkXmjlb6pdMCnKcc1W5eLBRVh15J6zIzsr5Mk8WyYiVUH1fwXkhnF65Of7iKfITLNuAIn/hGbfrmCgu3kR1l6uIoKt1kSw/ETiEY0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=ngrAgAQzBkY1jIarJ3mnCCWYE9Yq7cAeN7500Umb+c9948HkdRIF6nQ3EiJipNM8AIlLVu7VPTTKHvBU9G5Gu9RylKvFHz9Lw2UKJLjwsF/EsxvuU4Ngd4q/ksYxu++1wIlntkarJOlcHdFyvKKbl+w+R9RxIY9EzNnm2iIDfxg= Received: by 10.90.53.16 with SMTP id b16mr1769228aga.1180707585107; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?9.37.214.131? ( [129.33.49.251]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 14sm80585wrl.2007.06.01.07.19.43; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:19:43 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: References: <23286209-D1AA-46ED-AD3E-3E16876DE2BE@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Paul McMahan Subject: Re: intentional change to ErrorReportValve? Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 10:19:47 -0400 To: "Tomcat Developers List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Yoav, Thanks for following up. Yesterday rev 543307 fixed the problem in tc6.0.x/trunk. But the problem still remains in trunk. Not sure if there are plans to apply BZ 42559 there as well. Best wishes, Paul On Jun 1, 2007, at 9:49 AM, Yoav Shapira wrote: > Hi,. > > On 5/30/07, Paul McMahan wrote: >> A recent change to ErrorReportValve is causing a problem with TCK. >> From the commit log it seems that the change was not supposed to >> introduce any new behavior: >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=535915 >> >> But the valve's behavior was changed because the check for >> response.isCommitted() was replaced with response.isAppCommitted(). >> Was that change intentional or should it be reverted? > > Paul, did you ever hear back on this? I'd be concerned with a TCK > failure in this area. > > Yoav > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org