You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net> on 2005/12/19 16:17:18 UTC
[Fwd: Re: Release 1.0 Status - Release Candidate 20051219 Available
for Review]
Have downloaded and tested the latest candidate and can offer the
following feedback:
- startup verbosity on windows is fixed..
- The latest Release note updates seem to be missing from the build. Hmm
the code change email notifications had indicated that Aaron committed
the changes.. ??
- redirect links for "additional docs" and "additional samples" are
broken. Believe we can fix this up with the redirects at apache.org and
doesn't require changes to the build.
- As expected, the shutdown exception (GERONIMO-1371) still occurs.
Would be nice to get this in the Release Notes if we respin for some
other reason. Otherwise, perhaps we just have updated Release notes
available on the download page..
- Deploying a sample application war results in a new deployment
exception for *Jetty*. This works fine for *Tomcat*.. Hadn't seen this
in previous builds..
org.apache.geronimo.common.DeploymentException: web.xml includes
security elements but Geronimo deployment plan is not provided or does
not contain <security-realm-name> and <security> elements necessary to
configured security accordingly.
at
org.apache.geronimo.jetty.deployment.JettyModuleBuilder.initContext(JettyModuleBuilder.java:426)
See the full exception stack:
http://www.rafb.net/paste/results/3aSLe566.html
Strange.. the error is shown in my console but not in the geronimo.log
file..
The war file are at:
http://svn.apache.org/repository/geronimo/wars/geronimo-servlet-examples-tomcat-5.5.12-1.war
Have attached both my Jetty and Tomcat Deployment plans.. BTW, this is
one of the default examples that we include in the distributuion. I
have changed the plan from car->war and changed the context-root as part
of the test..
Thoughts?
Thanks
-Dave-
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> That said, the new build is available at
> http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/geronimo-1.0 and the file names are:
>
> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.zip
> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.zip
> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>
> Please take time to review the builds and provide your feedback. As
> noted above, barring a catastrophe this will be the release that will go
> out as 1.0. There are many additional features and fixes we want to get
> into the release but we also need to get a release to our users.
> Assuming the TCK passes and there is no negative feedback then we'll
> start a vote for the release. TCK testing was started around 0300 EST
> on 12/19.
>
> It is very important to take the 30 minutes needed to download and test
> the server. Please take that precious time sooner than later :)
>
> Matt
>
>
>
Re: [Fwd: Re: Release 1.0 Status - Release Candidate 20051219 Available for Review]
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
Oops, I didn't know there were two. :) Let's delete the copy in the
root and just put a README.txt there aimed at developers and saying
the interesting getting started documents are in
modules/scripts/src/resources.
Aaron
On 12/19/05, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> Aaron,
>
> Looks like you updated the RELEASE-NOTES in the root of the build tree. Part of
> the build process is that this file needs to be located in
> modules/scripts/src/resources/ where it is picked up and placed in the built
> distributions. We need to fix this in the build process as having the file in
> two places will only continue to cause this problem.
>
> DJencks, can / should we copy the files from the root of the tree to the
> modules/scripts/src/resources or simply delete them out of the build tree and
> make the modules/scripts the only official copy?
>
> thoughts?
>
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > For what it's worth, the 1.0.0 tag has the release notes update (look
> > for the "Known Issues" section right before the list of JIRAs). I'm
> > downloading the build now to make sure it has the same.
> >
> > Your problem was caused by my security fix, and it's exactly what it
> > says: "web.xml includes security elements but Geronimo deployment plan
> > is not provided or does not contain <security-realm-name> and
> > <security> elements necessary to configure security accordingly."
> >
> > In other words, the app declared security constraints and/or security
> > roles, but the Geronimo deployment plan did not provide a realm to
> > authenticate against or role mappings for the J2EE roles. The plans
> > for those sample applications were updated to include that
> > information.
> >
> > Any other web apps with security settings but no Geronimo plan (or a
> > Geronimo plan with no security settings) will need to be updated
> > similarly. The situation with Tomcat is different only in that it
> > doesn't reject the deployment, it just deploys but no logins will
> > actually work. Either way, the security settings in web.xml aren't
> > doing what you expect until you provide the right info in your
> > Geronimo plan.
> >
> > As a side note, the Servlet-Examples and JSP-Examples are just a
> > little weird in that all the user-facing content is insecurie by
> > design (the secure pages can only be accessed by manually entering the
> > correct URL, as far as I can tell).
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > On 12/19/05, Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >>To continue the thread of answering myself :)
> >>
> >>Works great with the new plans.. I think this change/behavior needs to
> >>be fairly well documented as simple deployments now have different
> >>requirements between web containers. Is this a candidate for the "known
> >>issues" section of the release notes?
> >>
> >>Thanks
> >>-Dave-
> >>
> >>
> >>Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> >>
> >>>Ahhh.. I see the changes to the deployment plans that Matt made in the
> >>>early am for Jetty.. Will redeploy with the updated plans..
> >>>
> >>>-Dave-
> >>>
> >>>Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Have downloaded and tested the latest candidate and can offer the
> >>>>following feedback:
> >>>>
> >>>>- startup verbosity on windows is fixed..
> >>>>
> >>>>- The latest Release note updates seem to be missing from the build. Hmm
> >>>>the code change email notifications had indicated that Aaron committed
> >>>>the changes.. ??
> >>>>
> >>>>- redirect links for "additional docs" and "additional samples" are
> >>>>broken. Believe we can fix this up with the redirects at apache.org and
> >>>> doesn't require changes to the build.
> >>>>
> >>>>- As expected, the shutdown exception (GERONIMO-1371) still occurs.
> >>>>Would be nice to get this in the Release Notes if we respin for some
> >>>>other reason. Otherwise, perhaps we just have updated Release notes
> >>>>available on the download page..
> >>>>
> >>>>- Deploying a sample application war results in a new deployment
> >>>>exception for *Jetty*. This works fine for *Tomcat*.. Hadn't seen this
> >>>>in previous builds..
> >>>>
> >>>>org.apache.geronimo.common.DeploymentException: web.xml includes
> >>>>security elements but Geronimo deployment plan is not provided or does
> >>>>not contain <security-realm-name> and <security> elements necessary to
> >>>>configured security accordingly.
> >>>> at
> >>>>org.apache.geronimo.jetty.deployment.JettyModuleBuilder.initContext(JettyModuleBuilder.java:426)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> See the full exception stack:
> >>>>http://www.rafb.net/paste/results/3aSLe566.html
> >>>>
> >>>>Strange.. the error is shown in my console but not in the geronimo.log
> >>>>file..
> >>>>
> >>>>The war file are at:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://svn.apache.org/repository/geronimo/wars/geronimo-servlet-examples-tomcat-5.5.12-1.war
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Have attached both my Jetty and Tomcat Deployment plans.. BTW, this is
> >>>>one of the default examples that we include in the distributuion. I
> >>>>have changed the plan from car->war and changed the context-root as part
> >>>>of the test..
> >>>>
> >>>>Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks
> >>>>-Dave-
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>That said, the new build is available at
> >>>>>http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/geronimo-1.0 and the file names are:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.zip
> >>>>>geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
> >>>>>geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.zip
> >>>>>geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Please take time to review the builds and provide your feedback. As
> >>>>>noted above, barring a catastrophe this will be the release that will
> >>>>>go out as 1.0. There are many additional features and fixes we want
> >>>>>to get into the release but we also need to get a release to our
> >>>>>users. Assuming the TCK passes and there is no negative feedback
> >>>>>then we'll start a vote for the release. TCK testing was started
> >>>>>around 0300 EST on 12/19.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>It is very important to take the 30 minutes needed to download and
> >>>>>test the server. Please take that precious time sooner than later :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [Fwd: Re: Release 1.0 Status - Release Candidate 20051219 Available
for Review]
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
Aaron,
Looks like you updated the RELEASE-NOTES in the root of the build tree. Part of
the build process is that this file needs to be located in
modules/scripts/src/resources/ where it is picked up and placed in the built
distributions. We need to fix this in the build process as having the file in
two places will only continue to cause this problem.
DJencks, can / should we copy the files from the root of the tree to the
modules/scripts/src/resources or simply delete them out of the build tree and
make the modules/scripts the only official copy?
thoughts?
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> For what it's worth, the 1.0.0 tag has the release notes update (look
> for the "Known Issues" section right before the list of JIRAs). I'm
> downloading the build now to make sure it has the same.
>
> Your problem was caused by my security fix, and it's exactly what it
> says: "web.xml includes security elements but Geronimo deployment plan
> is not provided or does not contain <security-realm-name> and
> <security> elements necessary to configure security accordingly."
>
> In other words, the app declared security constraints and/or security
> roles, but the Geronimo deployment plan did not provide a realm to
> authenticate against or role mappings for the J2EE roles. The plans
> for those sample applications were updated to include that
> information.
>
> Any other web apps with security settings but no Geronimo plan (or a
> Geronimo plan with no security settings) will need to be updated
> similarly. The situation with Tomcat is different only in that it
> doesn't reject the deployment, it just deploys but no logins will
> actually work. Either way, the security settings in web.xml aren't
> doing what you expect until you provide the right info in your
> Geronimo plan.
>
> As a side note, the Servlet-Examples and JSP-Examples are just a
> little weird in that all the user-facing content is insecurie by
> design (the secure pages can only be accessed by manually entering the
> correct URL, as far as I can tell).
>
> Aaron
>
> On 12/19/05, Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>To continue the thread of answering myself :)
>>
>>Works great with the new plans.. I think this change/behavior needs to
>>be fairly well documented as simple deployments now have different
>>requirements between web containers. Is this a candidate for the "known
>>issues" section of the release notes?
>>
>>Thanks
>>-Dave-
>>
>>
>>Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>
>>>Ahhh.. I see the changes to the deployment plans that Matt made in the
>>>early am for Jetty.. Will redeploy with the updated plans..
>>>
>>>-Dave-
>>>
>>>Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Have downloaded and tested the latest candidate and can offer the
>>>>following feedback:
>>>>
>>>>- startup verbosity on windows is fixed..
>>>>
>>>>- The latest Release note updates seem to be missing from the build. Hmm
>>>>the code change email notifications had indicated that Aaron committed
>>>>the changes.. ??
>>>>
>>>>- redirect links for "additional docs" and "additional samples" are
>>>>broken. Believe we can fix this up with the redirects at apache.org and
>>>> doesn't require changes to the build.
>>>>
>>>>- As expected, the shutdown exception (GERONIMO-1371) still occurs.
>>>>Would be nice to get this in the Release Notes if we respin for some
>>>>other reason. Otherwise, perhaps we just have updated Release notes
>>>>available on the download page..
>>>>
>>>>- Deploying a sample application war results in a new deployment
>>>>exception for *Jetty*. This works fine for *Tomcat*.. Hadn't seen this
>>>>in previous builds..
>>>>
>>>>org.apache.geronimo.common.DeploymentException: web.xml includes
>>>>security elements but Geronimo deployment plan is not provided or does
>>>>not contain <security-realm-name> and <security> elements necessary to
>>>>configured security accordingly.
>>>> at
>>>>org.apache.geronimo.jetty.deployment.JettyModuleBuilder.initContext(JettyModuleBuilder.java:426)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> See the full exception stack:
>>>>http://www.rafb.net/paste/results/3aSLe566.html
>>>>
>>>>Strange.. the error is shown in my console but not in the geronimo.log
>>>>file..
>>>>
>>>>The war file are at:
>>>>
>>>>http://svn.apache.org/repository/geronimo/wars/geronimo-servlet-examples-tomcat-5.5.12-1.war
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Have attached both my Jetty and Tomcat Deployment plans.. BTW, this is
>>>>one of the default examples that we include in the distributuion. I
>>>>have changed the plan from car->war and changed the context-root as part
>>>>of the test..
>>>>
>>>>Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Thanks
>>>>-Dave-
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>That said, the new build is available at
>>>>>http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/geronimo-1.0 and the file names are:
>>>>>
>>>>>geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.zip
>>>>>geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>>>>>geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.zip
>>>>>geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>>>>>
>>>>>Please take time to review the builds and provide your feedback. As
>>>>>noted above, barring a catastrophe this will be the release that will
>>>>>go out as 1.0. There are many additional features and fixes we want
>>>>>to get into the release but we also need to get a release to our
>>>>>users. Assuming the TCK passes and there is no negative feedback
>>>>>then we'll start a vote for the release. TCK testing was started
>>>>>around 0300 EST on 12/19.
>>>>>
>>>>>It is very important to take the 30 minutes needed to download and
>>>>>test the server. Please take that precious time sooner than later :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
>
Re: [Fwd: Re: Release 1.0 Status - Release Candidate 20051219 Available for Review]
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
For what it's worth, the 1.0.0 tag has the release notes update (look
for the "Known Issues" section right before the list of JIRAs). I'm
downloading the build now to make sure it has the same.
Your problem was caused by my security fix, and it's exactly what it
says: "web.xml includes security elements but Geronimo deployment plan
is not provided or does not contain <security-realm-name> and
<security> elements necessary to configure security accordingly."
In other words, the app declared security constraints and/or security
roles, but the Geronimo deployment plan did not provide a realm to
authenticate against or role mappings for the J2EE roles. The plans
for those sample applications were updated to include that
information.
Any other web apps with security settings but no Geronimo plan (or a
Geronimo plan with no security settings) will need to be updated
similarly. The situation with Tomcat is different only in that it
doesn't reject the deployment, it just deploys but no logins will
actually work. Either way, the security settings in web.xml aren't
doing what you expect until you provide the right info in your
Geronimo plan.
As a side note, the Servlet-Examples and JSP-Examples are just a
little weird in that all the user-facing content is insecurie by
design (the secure pages can only be accessed by manually entering the
correct URL, as far as I can tell).
Aaron
On 12/19/05, Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> To continue the thread of answering myself :)
>
> Works great with the new plans.. I think this change/behavior needs to
> be fairly well documented as simple deployments now have different
> requirements between web containers. Is this a candidate for the "known
> issues" section of the release notes?
>
> Thanks
> -Dave-
>
>
> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> > Ahhh.. I see the changes to the deployment plans that Matt made in the
> > early am for Jetty.. Will redeploy with the updated plans..
> >
> > -Dave-
> >
> > Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> >
> >> Have downloaded and tested the latest candidate and can offer the
> >> following feedback:
> >>
> >> - startup verbosity on windows is fixed..
> >>
> >> - The latest Release note updates seem to be missing from the build. Hmm
> >> the code change email notifications had indicated that Aaron committed
> >> the changes.. ??
> >>
> >> - redirect links for "additional docs" and "additional samples" are
> >> broken. Believe we can fix this up with the redirects at apache.org and
> >> doesn't require changes to the build.
> >>
> >> - As expected, the shutdown exception (GERONIMO-1371) still occurs.
> >> Would be nice to get this in the Release Notes if we respin for some
> >> other reason. Otherwise, perhaps we just have updated Release notes
> >> available on the download page..
> >>
> >> - Deploying a sample application war results in a new deployment
> >> exception for *Jetty*. This works fine for *Tomcat*.. Hadn't seen this
> >> in previous builds..
> >>
> >> org.apache.geronimo.common.DeploymentException: web.xml includes
> >> security elements but Geronimo deployment plan is not provided or does
> >> not contain <security-realm-name> and <security> elements necessary to
> >> configured security accordingly.
> >> at
> >> org.apache.geronimo.jetty.deployment.JettyModuleBuilder.initContext(JettyModuleBuilder.java:426)
> >>
> >>
> >> See the full exception stack:
> >> http://www.rafb.net/paste/results/3aSLe566.html
> >>
> >> Strange.. the error is shown in my console but not in the geronimo.log
> >> file..
> >>
> >> The war file are at:
> >>
> >> http://svn.apache.org/repository/geronimo/wars/geronimo-servlet-examples-tomcat-5.5.12-1.war
> >>
> >>
> >> Have attached both my Jetty and Tomcat Deployment plans.. BTW, this is
> >> one of the default examples that we include in the distributuion. I
> >> have changed the plan from car->war and changed the context-root as part
> >> of the test..
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> -Dave-
> >>
> >>
> >> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> That said, the new build is available at
> >>> http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/geronimo-1.0 and the file names are:
> >>>
> >>> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.zip
> >>> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
> >>> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.zip
> >>> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
> >>>
> >>> Please take time to review the builds and provide your feedback. As
> >>> noted above, barring a catastrophe this will be the release that will
> >>> go out as 1.0. There are many additional features and fixes we want
> >>> to get into the release but we also need to get a release to our
> >>> users. Assuming the TCK passes and there is no negative feedback
> >>> then we'll start a vote for the release. TCK testing was started
> >>> around 0300 EST on 12/19.
> >>>
> >>> It is very important to take the 30 minutes needed to download and
> >>> test the server. Please take that precious time sooner than later :)
> >>>
> >>> Matt
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: [Fwd: Re: Release 1.0 Status - Release Candidate 20051219 Available
for Review]
Posted by Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net>.
To continue the thread of answering myself :)
Works great with the new plans.. I think this change/behavior needs to
be fairly well documented as simple deployments now have different
requirements between web containers. Is this a candidate for the "known
issues" section of the release notes?
Thanks
-Dave-
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> Ahhh.. I see the changes to the deployment plans that Matt made in the
> early am for Jetty.. Will redeploy with the updated plans..
>
> -Dave-
>
> Dave Colasurdo wrote:
>
>> Have downloaded and tested the latest candidate and can offer the
>> following feedback:
>>
>> - startup verbosity on windows is fixed..
>>
>> - The latest Release note updates seem to be missing from the build. Hmm
>> the code change email notifications had indicated that Aaron committed
>> the changes.. ??
>>
>> - redirect links for "additional docs" and "additional samples" are
>> broken. Believe we can fix this up with the redirects at apache.org and
>> doesn't require changes to the build.
>>
>> - As expected, the shutdown exception (GERONIMO-1371) still occurs.
>> Would be nice to get this in the Release Notes if we respin for some
>> other reason. Otherwise, perhaps we just have updated Release notes
>> available on the download page..
>>
>> - Deploying a sample application war results in a new deployment
>> exception for *Jetty*. This works fine for *Tomcat*.. Hadn't seen this
>> in previous builds..
>>
>> org.apache.geronimo.common.DeploymentException: web.xml includes
>> security elements but Geronimo deployment plan is not provided or does
>> not contain <security-realm-name> and <security> elements necessary to
>> configured security accordingly.
>> at
>> org.apache.geronimo.jetty.deployment.JettyModuleBuilder.initContext(JettyModuleBuilder.java:426)
>>
>>
>> See the full exception stack:
>> http://www.rafb.net/paste/results/3aSLe566.html
>>
>> Strange.. the error is shown in my console but not in the geronimo.log
>> file..
>>
>> The war file are at:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repository/geronimo/wars/geronimo-servlet-examples-tomcat-5.5.12-1.war
>>
>>
>> Have attached both my Jetty and Tomcat Deployment plans.. BTW, this is
>> one of the default examples that we include in the distributuion. I
>> have changed the plan from car->war and changed the context-root as part
>> of the test..
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Dave-
>>
>>
>> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That said, the new build is available at
>>> http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/geronimo-1.0 and the file names are:
>>>
>>> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.zip
>>> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>>> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.zip
>>> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>>>
>>> Please take time to review the builds and provide your feedback. As
>>> noted above, barring a catastrophe this will be the release that will
>>> go out as 1.0. There are many additional features and fixes we want
>>> to get into the release but we also need to get a release to our
>>> users. Assuming the TCK passes and there is no negative feedback
>>> then we'll start a vote for the release. TCK testing was started
>>> around 0300 EST on 12/19.
>>>
>>> It is very important to take the 30 minutes needed to download and
>>> test the server. Please take that precious time sooner than later :)
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: [Fwd: Re: Release 1.0 Status - Release Candidate 20051219 Available
for Review]
Posted by Dave Colasurdo <da...@earthlink.net>.
Ahhh.. I see the changes to the deployment plans that Matt made in the
early am for Jetty.. Will redeploy with the updated plans..
-Dave-
Dave Colasurdo wrote:
> Have downloaded and tested the latest candidate and can offer the
> following feedback:
>
> - startup verbosity on windows is fixed..
>
> - The latest Release note updates seem to be missing from the build. Hmm
> the code change email notifications had indicated that Aaron committed
> the changes.. ??
>
> - redirect links for "additional docs" and "additional samples" are
> broken. Believe we can fix this up with the redirects at apache.org and
> doesn't require changes to the build.
>
> - As expected, the shutdown exception (GERONIMO-1371) still occurs.
> Would be nice to get this in the Release Notes if we respin for some
> other reason. Otherwise, perhaps we just have updated Release notes
> available on the download page..
>
> - Deploying a sample application war results in a new deployment
> exception for *Jetty*. This works fine for *Tomcat*.. Hadn't seen this
> in previous builds..
>
> org.apache.geronimo.common.DeploymentException: web.xml includes
> security elements but Geronimo deployment plan is not provided or does
> not contain <security-realm-name> and <security> elements necessary to
> configured security accordingly.
> at
> org.apache.geronimo.jetty.deployment.JettyModuleBuilder.initContext(JettyModuleBuilder.java:426)
>
>
> See the full exception stack:
> http://www.rafb.net/paste/results/3aSLe566.html
>
> Strange.. the error is shown in my console but not in the geronimo.log
> file..
>
> The war file are at:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repository/geronimo/wars/geronimo-servlet-examples-tomcat-5.5.12-1.war
>
>
> Have attached both my Jetty and Tomcat Deployment plans.. BTW, this is
> one of the default examples that we include in the distributuion. I
> have changed the plan from car->war and changed the context-root as part
> of the test..
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Thanks
> -Dave-
>
>
> Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>>
>> That said, the new build is available at
>> http://people.apache.org/~hogstrom/geronimo-1.0 and the file names are:
>>
>> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.zip
>> geronimo-jetty-j2ee-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.zip
>> geronimo-jetty-tomcat-1.0-20051219.tar.gz
>>
>> Please take time to review the builds and provide your feedback. As
>> noted above, barring a catastrophe this will be the release that will
>> go out as 1.0. There are many additional features and fixes we want
>> to get into the release but we also need to get a release to our
>> users. Assuming the TCK passes and there is no negative feedback then
>> we'll start a vote for the release. TCK testing was started around
>> 0300 EST on 12/19.
>>
>> It is very important to take the 30 minutes needed to download and
>> test the server. Please take that precious time sooner than later :)
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>