costinm@covalent.net wrote:
>
> The point is not about developing multiple implementations - but about
> beeing a part of the community and proposing/discussing changes instead
> of posting announcements of a fork's releases.
>
Costin,
My response got to be way too long, so here's just a summary.
It comes off as a bit clipped, but that's because it's short,
not because the questions were unreasonable :-)
- I did discuss MinTC/MinimalTomcat on the dev list, check the
archives. The topic didn't seem very popular, but I took that
to mean I had weird requirements that few others shared. Later
on, I started making announcements as a way to generate
discussion and keep the core developers up-to-date.
- It's not a fork. If it were a fork, I wouldn't care about the
core code. But it's not, so I do. It's not Tomcat 4, but it
is, by any reasonable definition, a version of Catalina.
- It was always my intention to propose donating the code back
to Apache, I should have been more clear about this. But I
wanted to wait for the 1.0 release, for obvious reasons.
- MinTC is not competition for Tomcat. You would have to be
frigging insane to use MinTC if you could possibly use
Tomcat 4 instead. But sometimes Tomcat 4 is difficult or
impossible to use. That's not because Tomcat 4 is bad, it's
just that it's full featured. I didn't think a patch
to remove MBeans, JNDI and auto-deployment from the core
would be well received :-) If you're interested, there's
more detail on the MinTC page.
Thanks for your feedback,
--
Christopher St. John cks@distributopia.com
DistribuTopia http://www.distributopia.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
|