tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher K.St.John <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] MinimalTomcat, Coupling, Bugs 6669, 6670
Date Mon, 25 Feb 2002 23:57:37 GMT
Aaron Smuts wrote:
> I'm very interested.  We should call it HouseCat.  I'd
> like to find a home for it if it doesn't fit into tomcat.

 I detest housecats, but I suppose that's not really the
point :-)

 I'm not sure my is generally useful. The basic approach
probably is, but maybe not the code.

 I personally don't really need all the
run-time event stuff (not the servlet-spec events, the
Catalina internal events). I don't need JSP. I don't
need run-time parsing of the config server.xml and
web.xml files. I don't need the full-on security
architecture (so I don't need facades and I don't
need SecurityManager code). I don't need (but kinda
want) the JMX management interfaces. Etc.

 The code I've written is only useful if you're
eliminating the exact same set of things I am. Otherwise,
you bloat out until you're full-on Catalina again.
(OTOH, projects like Galeon managed to find generally
useful subsets of Mozilla, so there's an existence proof
that such a thing is possible.)

 But if I'm the only one use Catalina as a framework 
instead of as a monolithic servlet container, it isn't
going to work. There's too much pressure on developers
to 'cheat' and tightly couple all the implementation
classes. It's just easier that way. Right now, MinimalTomcat
basically can't use anything  within o.a.catalina.core,
but eventually all the packages will be tightly linked
unless there's some sort of incentive not to.

Christopher St. John

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message