Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:13:55 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Endre_St=F8lsvik?= <Endre@Stolsvik.com>
To: Tomcat Developers List <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [5.next] Progress
In-Reply-To: <40F6C40D.20003@apache.org>
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.LNX.4.44.0407161204520.4377-100000@excalibur.intra.coretrek.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Remy Maucherat wrote:

| Jess Holle wrote:
| > Just a note:
| >
| > Please allow the anti-locking stuff to be skipped on Windows as well.
| > [Some of us value performance over deployment convenience.]
|
| Yes, of course. In production, many people don't use hot deployment (it
| doesn't give good enough QoS right now, IMO).
|
| >> - Possibly require JDK 1.5 (cleaner code, annotations, integrated JMX
| >> and JMX
| >> remote, etc)
| >
| > It would be good to get many of the changes listed above this last point
| > available in 5.0.x and usable with JDK 1.4.2 and then branch to 5.1 and
| > do 1.5-specific goodies.
|
| No for 5.0.x, as nearly everything in my list requires API breakage :(
| For now, I don't have any JDK 1.5 features in mind: this item is there
| just in case.

In my opinion, it is very bad to require the -latest- JDK there is for
such low-level "software-stack-components" as the Servlet Container is.
I mean, the 1.5 (5.0) isn't even released!
  There should at least be a couple of viable JDKs of a particular
version, before you intend to depend Tomcat on it (e.g. when IBM, SUN,
JRockit and a couple of others (!) have a J2SDK 5.0-version out, you might
consider it). Any depedencies on 1.5 should -most definately- be done
using introspection or configurable "1.5 classes" that you can add if you
want.

IMHO, I think you should make Tomcat run perfectly, and actually develop
it, on 1.3.

Endre

PS: What an IDIOTIC versioning scheme Sun is using!! What on earth is the
idea with "Java -2-", and then upping the minor-versioning to -5-??
"Java 2 version 5.0".. WHAT???
  It actually pisses me off - can't we just say "Java 5", then?


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