tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Remy Maucherat <>
Subject Re: Proposal draft for Tomcat 5.0
Date Mon, 24 Jun 2002 09:24:31 GMT
Glenn Nielsen wrote:
> "Craig R. McClanahan" wrote:
>>On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Glenn Nielsen wrote:
>>>Providing a great java web server is not a goal of Tomcat.
>>I didn't know cats could talk :-).
>>I didn't know that Glenn, or Pier, or any single developer, speaks for the
>>entire Tomcat developer community.
> Ok, I phrased that wrong.  Of course I don't speak for the entire Tomcat
> developer community.  I have been involved in this community for
> over 2 years and I have never seen "Providing a great java web server"
> proposed as a Tomcat feature or even discussed.  If you and Remy have that
> as a goal, great!  I personally wouldn't list that as a very high priority.
>>This statement (a great java web server) has always been one of my
>>personal goals for Tomcat.  People who use the current generation web
>>connectors (unless they really do need it for the performance) have to be
>>a little masochistic to put up with the configuration and admin quirks
>>(although they are getting less onerous).
>>But that doesn't mean I'm going to suggest that the connectors be kicked
>>out just because *I* don't care about them.
> I didn't say kick them out, I said put them in their own repository,
> like jakarta-tomcat-connectors and Coyote is right now. 
>>>I have no use for things like SSI, CGI, or WEBDAV either. In fact
>>>it would be nice if these three items were moved to another repository
>>>so that they could have separate release cycles.
>>Repositories being the same or different doesn't have anything to do with
>>release cycles -- that's an issue of how you choose to package the output.
>>>What I am interested in is a reliable standards compilant application server
>>>that has the features I need for virtual hosting customer applications using
>>>Apache as the web server. Tomcat 4.1 is getting very close to meeting those
>>>needs. Performance is important, but secondary to reliablity and features.
>>That's a perfectly valid need.  So's the need for something you can
>>install on a PC and get the "Hello, World" example up and running in three
>>minutes or less after you've downloaded it.  So is the need to have a
>>server that is portable across environments that nobody is bothering to
>>support native connectors for, but has a JVM.  To say nothing of the need
>>to embed HTTP support in other Java server applications.  And also the
>>need to have a servlet/JSP development platform that lets me turn around
>>my compile-debug cycles without starting the server every single time.  To
>>say nothing of small-to-medium scale websites that don't get 8 million
>>hits per day, and Tomcat is "fast enough" even if it isn't "fastest
> Gee, you must have missed where I said  "Its nice that Tomcat supports HTTP, 
> this makes setting up a development environment easier.".  When I stated
> that I had all of the above in mind (except small to medium size websites).
> Based on my experience using Tomcat in production, I would want a solid
> web server like Apache in front of Tomcat to serve static content reliably.
> I am not masochistic enough to use Tomcat as the HTTP server for a site I
> am responsible for 7x24 coverage for.
>>Tomcat can meet all of those needs, but only if the developers are
>>unselfish enough to understand that "I don't need that feature" does *not*
>>mean "it should not be there at all".  Such selfishness has not
>>historically been a part of Apache culture in the five or so years I've
>>been around -- I'd hate to see it start here and now.
> Craig, I applaud your vision and leadership with catalina.  You did a
> great job. :-)
> I thought the ASF was about creating a community (meritocracy) where 
> proposals, ideas, directions, and code can be discussed openly and the 
> validity of them could be challenged.  So that only the best ideas rise 
> to the top.  When did this get redefined to mean selfish?
> I see the proposal for a major new revision of Tomcat as a watershed event.
> It should be a time for the tomcat community to do some introspection of 
> where Tomcat currently is and what direction it should go in the future.
> The process of discussing this might be messy but hopefully in the end
> what will be left is a well thought out proposal that most everyone can
> agree with.

We did, and apparently, there are 3 people disagreeing with the new 
proposal (one of whom because he just doesn't care, to quote his own words).
So I think this is pretty good, and definitely a lot better than the 
level of "community bonding" that was achieved for the 4.0 proposal ;-)

I'll make some slight changes to the proposal to make it a bit more 
precise on what changes will be included.


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

View raw message