tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Remy Maucherat <r...@betaversion.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Tomcat 4.0-beta API Change: Security Manager Facades
Date Fri, 19 Jan 2001 23:25:51 GMT
Quoting "Craig R. McClanahan" <Craig.McClanahan@eng.sun.com>:

> Kurt Schrader wrote:
> 
> > So what do we need a 4.1 branch for then?
> 
> If we take the action Remy recommends, we won't.  I'm +1 for this (it
> will certainly
> reduce the effort of double-committing all the changes), if we're
> willing to accept
> the fact that it will increase the time before a 4.0 production quality
> release is
> ready.

Given the delay caused by the security manager support inclusion and the Valve 
modifications, it won't probably cause any additional delay.

> The 4.1 branch was originally created because of a "feature freeze" on
> 4.0.  The
> various proposals today are effectively to "unfreeze" the 4.0 branch, so
> that some
> new functionality (already committed on the 4.1 branch) can get moved
> into 4.0
> instead, along with the other proposed changes that would otherwise need
> to be posted
> to both.
> 
> We can recreate the 4.1 branch at some future point when 4.0 is
> refrozen.

Agreed.
It that case, I suggest that the 4.1 branch be merged back ASAP. Having a non-
beta quality web connector in a beta wasn't a good thing anyway, IMO.

I wrongly interpreted the proposal on the security manager, as I was answering 
an email dealing with i18n at the same time (so I'm +1 now).
As Kief suggested, I think that no wrapping should occur if no security manager 
is present (common sense).

There is also a code change needed to provide proper i18n support. Instead of 
putting in a hack in 4.0 to get around one half of the issue, I suggest instead 
that some code is moved from the connector.http package to the connector 
package (some buffers, as well as some code which needs to be merged into 
HttpRequestBase).

Remy

Mime
View raw message