Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-tomcat-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 46128 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 22:58:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 22:58:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 28066 invoked by uid 97); 10 Dec 2002 22:59:58 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 28048 invoked by uid 97); 10 Dec 2002 22:59:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Tomcat Developers List" Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 28023 invoked by uid 98); 10 Dec 2002 22:59:57 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Path: not-for-mail From: Costin Manolache Subject: Re: FW: [VOTE] minimal JSR 154 only distribution Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:52:28 -0800 Lines: 79 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.84.39.162 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1039561113 18178 64.84.39.162 (10 Dec 2002 22:58:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:58:33 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/0.7.1 Sender: news X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N 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. Costin > > -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: