geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paul McMahan" <>
Subject Re: tomcat v6 integration game plan (longish)
Date Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:45:24 GMT
On 11/30/06, Jeff Genender <> wrote:
> Paul McMahan wrote:
> > -  I notice that the servlet 2.5 spec was copied into specs/trunk from
> > tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk.  Any concerns with taking the same approach for
> > the JSP 2.1 and EL specs?
> Were they copied or typed in?  I thought Bill Dudney typed them in or
> may have used the TC specs but made some changes.  I hate to copy them
> in, but for the sake of consistency, perhaps you can/should do that.

Oh yeah I had forgotten about the work Bill did on GERONIMO-1686.
That work was committed to specs/branches/jee5_exp.  But the servlet
2.5 stuff in specs/trunk/geronimo-servlet_2.5_spec was copied from

bash-3.1$ svn log src/main/java/javax/servlet/
r417823 | gregw | 2006-06-28 13:28:46 -0400 (Wed, 28 Jun 2006) | 1 line

refactored from tc layout to g layout
r417806 | gregw | 2006-06-28 12:10:56 -0400 (Wed, 28 Jun 2006) | 1 line

interim commit before restructure to allow history to be retained
r397540 | remm | 2006-04-27 09:33:39 -0400 (Thu, 27 Apr 2006) | 1 line

- Remove JSP related resources.

Following the comments in GERONIMO-1686 it looks like the tc6 copy was
preferred because of javadoc.  Since there are no JSP 2.1 or EL specs
already in specs/branches/jee5_exp I was just planning to also copy
them from tc6.  That's assuming that we actually *need* a copy in
geronimo/specs.  See below.

> There was talk of Grand Central Project here at Apache, which would
> provide for a one-stop-shop for specs to prevent from copying.  Anybody
> hear of any movement on that?
> This seems like the best idea for Apache's projects.

I agree this is a good idea and would help avoid redundant efforts.

In the short term I'm wondering why we need a copy of specs in
geronimo/specs/trunk if they're already available in a maven repo?
I've been operating under the assumption there's some good reason for
maintaining a separate copy in Geronimo, probably copyright related.
But if that's not the case it would be easier to use what I found at:

I don't know who published those artifacts or if all the correct legal
bits are in place.  Anyone care to enlighten me as to whether or not
Geronimo really needs its own copy of the specs, and if not then how
to determine if artifacts such as the above are ok from a
legal/copyright perspective?  This is where the Grand Central Project
would be a big help...

Best wishes,

View raw message