Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 58741 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2000 01:37:22 -0000 Received: from hellfire.clearink.com (HELO clearink.com) (205.227.191.11) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Dec 2000 01:37:22 -0000 Received: from [131.161.251.227] ([131.161.251.227]) by clearink.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id eBA1bMl13444 for ; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 17:37:22 -0800 User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 17:37:24 -0800 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] JSSI for Tomcat From: Jon Stevens To: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3A32C66B.6FF6D9D3@gefionsoftware.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N on 12/9/2000 3:55 PM, "Hans Bergsten" wrote: > I know the migration of Java Apache projects has been discussed, but > I have not seen a formal decision being made by PMC. So I like to > run it by the PMC anyway, but based on what you say it sounds like it > will not be any problem then. This has already been formalized and even advertised as happening. Look at the Jakarta and Java Apache homepages as it clearly discusses this. In essence, I'm just trying to save everyone time here. > Another thing. If the migrated JSSI is supposed to continue to support > JServ (sounds reasonable) No need to do that. >, maybe this should be called TSSI instead to > avoid confusion (since it relies on TC internals and use TC package names). > An alternative would be to keep the JSSI name but use TC package names and > make it work with JServ as well as TC 3.2 in the initial version. Comments? +1 for TSSI. -jon