tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <>
Subject Re: FW: [VOTE] minimal JSR 154 only distribution
Date Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:52:28 GMT
Jon Scott Stevens wrote:

> I'm going to repost this message once again because it seems Remy and
> Costin didn't bother reading it the first time and are now essentially
> agreeing to what I suggested below.
> What-EVER!

What-EVER to you.

Reading your posts is not my favorite activity - for this one I stoped
at the first phrase ( "a tree of downloads" ).

What Remy and Costin are agreeing on is one tomcat release that includes
multiple profiles - so people can run "jsr154" or "minimal" or "default"
or "all".  

Even if I would have passed this - the Java Server Faces part is clearly the
end of your message for me ( and should have been the end of the 
conversation ). 

I don't know why you have the impression that I have to bother reading
your messages. 


> -jon
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: Jon Scott Stevens <>
> Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <>
> Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 01:16:20 -0800
> To: tomcat-dev <>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] minimal JSR 154 only distribution
> What I would love to see is a tree of downloads where each one gains more
> and more features (it is additive). Such as:
>                  JSR-154 Implementation
>                 /                      \
>              Jasper                  Velocity
>               /   \                     \
>  Admin Tool (JMX) Java Server Feces   Scarab
> That way, you only need to download what you need. Bundles are easily
> created by simply picking off the branch of the tree that you want. If you
> want the "Tomcat" distribution with web based administration abilities,
> then you grab it at the "Admin Tool" level and so on. We can even build an
> ant based system which is able to help us manage the selection of
> components to include in the distribution. This would be similar to the
> way that we currently have jar repositories and dependencies, but on an
> application level. "Click here to install Jasper, Struts, etc."
> Not only does this provide our users the ability to simply get what they
> need (and add it after the fact if they don't have it), it helps us focus
> on providing a pluggable system which is separate from the other systems
> (ie: clean dependencies).
> I personally think that this is a much cleaner way of providing
> distributions because it does not require people to learn or deal with
> things they do not care about. Options are a good thing. Let's not limit
> ourselves.
> One last point, we should be able to experiment around here. The negative
> votes have been based on biases about what I think about Jasper and my
> opinions. They are not based on the idea that experimentation is a good
> thing and I think that is just plain wrong and very closed minded. Who are
> you to decide what our users may or may not like? In the end, if things
> don't work out, then fine at least we learned something and we can move on
> to the next thing.
> What do we really have to loose here?
> -jon

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

View raw message