tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jean-frederic clere <>
Subject Re: Some JK2 ideas
Date Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:11:36 GMT
Mladen Turk wrote:
> Hi all,
> Seems that the JK2 development has been stalled for a while, cause either
> developers loose the interest, or it's so damn good :)
> I would like to propose few things that IMO could make the JK2 a better.
> 1. Get rid of JNI from core and make a new 'server/jni/(iis|apace2|xxx)'.
> This new would require java jre on server side. Also focus only on TC5
> embedded mode.
> It would require a lot of work like rewriting aprImpl and TomcatStarter, but
> it should finally work something like Jrun or ServletExec.
> This would be better explained as jk2jni then jk2/jni, but since they will
> be using the same code base...
> 1.1 Make APR_JNI project.
> Something like APR_UTIL or APR_ICONV that will give a portable JNI
> interface, using APR.

+1, but may be that is a new project.

> 2. -> workers2.xml using apr_utils xml support.
> Get rid of 'assumed' properties like figuring out the context from url.
> Get rid of copying mappings from 'default' to virtual hosts.
> Of course, it would require few extra 'boring' statements in the config for
> each mapping.

-0, that does not bring new features.

> 3. Get rid of Jk2* from Apache module and use only
> 'Jk2On'
> That will register the JK2 in the same way as filter on IIS (for each
> virtual server).
> All this imply that the workers2.xml is the main config point, meaning that
> the same workers2.xml is operable either on IIS or Apache or any other web
> server. Also there are no other 'per-server' directives rather then 'on or
> off'.

I am not  in favour to remove JkUriSet because that makes easy things like 
servering fixed pages with Apache and get dynamic ones served  by Tomcat.

> 4. Get rid of all platform specific configuration stuff like WIN32 registry,
> event log, apache log, and use only JK2 log. 


> Something like I proposed two years ago, but since people tend to change its
> opinions, and since there was no major proposals for JK2 enhancements for
> two years (not counting myself), do I have a 'card banshee', or do I need to
> make a 'fork'?
> Waiting for response from someone that can 'provide' something different, or
> just file a veto :)
> MT.

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

View raw message