tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mladen Turk <>
Subject Re: Time for 2.0.51 and 2.1.0
Date Thu, 02 Sep 2004 17:59:38 GMT
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

>>Bad news for me and many others since without AJP support included in
>>2.0.x, users will still require to have mod_jk to link there HTTPD to
>>Could we hope the dev team to relax the situation for mod_proxy/ajp in
>>future 2.0.x release
> Admins understand why n.x -> (n+1).0 can sometimes break things.
> That's the natural aversion to .0 releases.  They can even understand
> if n.x.z -> n.(x+1).0 breaks things.  But please don't expect them
> to sympathize when n.x.z -> n.x.(z+1) starts breaking things, this
> undermines the confidence in one of the most successful open source
> projects in the world.

Although I'm not very happy with that, I must say that you hold
'all the aces' :).
The major problem is how to prove the new proxy stuff is stable
enough. Obviously we need a 2.1 release that will
'stick around' for a while, and prove the module's stability.

Further more, all this really looks like a 'killer' 2.1 feature,
with all that protocol and dynamic balancing stuff included.

What I'm concerned about right now is not whether it will be
backported or not, but rather does it works or not. The backport
discussion will be irrelevant when the later gets resolved.

> You have a simple option though - grab 2.0.  Replace the modules/proxy/
> tree with 2.1-dev and voila - buildconf - configure - make install.
> Or use 2.1-dev and help the effort of identifying when 2.1-dev reaches
> release quality.  Mladen provided both alternatives in the current mod.

We can even put some documentation about that to the jakarta site.
Since we have more then enthusiastic user base, I'm sure we'll receive
a lots of valuable real-world test's. But again, we may also encourage
users to use it's 'native' environment (being 2.1).


View raw message