tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <cmanola...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Minimal tomcat ( JSR154 + JSR152 )
Date Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:51:45 GMT
Pier Fumagalli wrote:

> On 9/12/02 23:58 "Costin Manolache" <cmanolache@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> But in this case you keep making false statements, and not only here. It
>> should be quite easy to look for a [VOTE] or [PROPOSAL] that you made
>> and was voted on tomcat-dev.
> 
> I swear that _LOVE_ my mates... My friend Tonia, who's apparently better
> than me in getting out old posts, actually _FOUND_ it! :-) Thank you :-)
> And for your own viewing pleasure, that's it...

Did your friend Tonia also found the 3 +1 votes ? 

Can someone explain to Pier that:
1. revolution can't be named tomcat-whatever
2. tomcat releases need a majority vote and at least 3 +1 votes.

I didn't say you can't name your stuff "jerry" - or anything else. 
And my comment on naming it "tomcat-high-availability" was on the code
that you done outside of tomcat. Do you still think it was ok to
do so ? You can check with the board or whoever else in apache about
that - or try to release an "apache httpd - high-availability". 

There are many proposals for "minimal" tomcat - and one of the main 
divergences between 3.3 and 4.0 was the number of features. ( and 
it turned both position had positive and negative aspects - 4.0 features
attracted probably more users than 3.3 minimality ). You may remember 
the <1M tomcat and the discussion about supporting J2ME with 3.3.
So don't tell me you invented the minimal tomcat 4 months ago.

When working in a community the behavior is quite important
and does have an effect on others and yourself.( that's true for Jon - and 
for myself :-) 

One thing we learned is that a proposal needs more than some technical
benefits - it also need buy-in from the community. That's how Apache
works - if you don't know that.

Costin


> 
> (OK, it didn't have the [PROPOSAL] tag, but the  wording was in there,
> c'mon, be flexible! :-)
> 
> Yes, ok, that's so true... I also vented the idea that _MAYBE_ (but maybe)
> someone could have reimplemented the Standard* classes, but WHAT THE HELL?
> 
> All I said I wanted was (quote myself) "more or less what Jon does for
> Scarab"...
> 
> I said that IN JUNE... JUNE for damn sake... And somewhere along this
> thread when it after degenerated in the usual flame war that always
> happens when something needs to be done you said "If possible, please also
> change the name - unless ASF gives you permission to use tomcat name in
> your product."
> 
> And now _I_ am the idiot who makes false statements... Damn... I _knew_ I
> had a reason to be upset...
> 
> Tonia, thanks, I owe you two favours for this one (next time I'm in the
> US!)
> 
>     Pier
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: 5.0 proposal
> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 21:49:51 +0100
> From: Pier Fumagalli <pier@betaversion.org>
> Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> To: Tomcat Developers List <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> costinm@covalent.net <costinm@covalent.net> wrote:
> 
>  > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>  >
>>> That's why counts where not right on my side of the border... I don't
>>> recall vetoing the proposal... I just complained vehemently that I'd
>>> prefer to see 4.0 out of the door and stable rather than a 4.1 and a
>>> 5.0...
>  >
>> 4.0 is out of door - the release happened long ago. So did 4.0.1...
>> 4.0.4.
>> 
>> 4.1 is getting close - and it should be more stable and better than
>> 4.0.4. And 5.0 should be more stable and better than 4.1 and 3.3.
>> 
>> And 6.0 will probably be better than 5.0.
>> 
>> If you are interested in maintaining and improving 4.0.4 - just volunteer
>> as release manager for the branch, you have my +1 on it.
> 
> I can't be a RM for 4.0.4 because I would simply remove 70% of the code,
> and kiddies would start crying their butts off because they don't have the
> manager application, or JSP support :)
> 
> But if anyone is interested I'd like to explore the opportunity of a
> Tomcat-HA (high-availability or hard-edition), based on 4.0 without the
> "crap" in there, and straightening out the request-response model...
> 
> Simply, take the Catalina classes, and remove piles of useless stuff (more
> or less what Jon does for Scarab, but to a greater degree, maybe even
> reimplementing some of the Standard* classes).
> 
>  >> I can't veto as I don't really care how you want to spend your
> evenings and
>  >> stuff...
>  >
>  > I don't think you can 'veto' a long term plan or release. AFAIK it's
>  > a majority vote.
> 
> Veto in terms of -1ing it.
> 
>      Pier




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message