tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Francois Arcand <Jeanfrancois.Arc...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: [5.0] More dependencies
Date Thu, 05 Jun 2003 19:52:24 GMT

Remy Maucherat wrote:
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>> - daemon: Home of Mladen's procrun, a very promising exe wrapper for 
>> Java programs on Windows; this also contains a Unix wrapper for Java 
>> programs; the Unix wrapper could be advertised as "the" recommended 
>> solution to run Tomcat on 80 on Unix, and included as source with 
>> Tomcat's binary d/l; this component is currently in the sandbox, and 
>> would need to be either moved ASAP to commons proper, or be migrated 
>> to j-t-c (if thought to be too Tomcat specific to exist in the 
>> commons); a RM will be needed [Mladen, Jean-Frederic]
> In this email, I forgot to speak about other commons (and others) 
> dependencies. Thanks for all the volunteering, BTW, it really helps 
> (damn day job ...) :)
> commons-collection: No problem.
> commons-beanutils: No problem.
> commons-launcher: Problem; I think I did release 0.9 with Patrick Luby a 
> long time ago, and the component has been dead since. Reviving it and 
> putting a websiter up could help, but it's not certain. This piece of 
> code was developed for the Sun web services pack 1.0 originally. Does 
> anyone use it anymore ? Can it be removed (in favor of native wrappers) 
> ? I have to admit it was quite nice, so I'd rather not have to remove it.

Yes, jwsdp 1.2 is still using it. I also think we should keep it.

> commons-digester: No problem.
> commons-logging: No problem.
> commons-pool: No problem.
> JMX: I think we should try to ship with JMX 1.2 + a JSR 160 
> implementation if possible. I really hope MX4J will be able to provide 
> that.
> Tyrex: This project seems dead (unfortunately) :-( We could replace it 
> with some other TM, or (I like that one better) not provide an object 
> factory implementation for UserTransaction by default, and let third 
> parties provide it. That model seems to work great for J2EE providers 
> (JOTM, OpenEJB, etc).
> Struts: We need 1.1 ! (I think the rest of the world does also :-D)
> Watchdog: (to the Sun folks) Where is Watchdog 5 (or whatever it's 
> called) ?

I'm unaware of such packages (but I will double check).

-- Jeanfrancois

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

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

View raw message