tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <>
Subject Re: Review model take 2
Date Thu, 20 Sep 2007 14:26:10 GMT
Costin Manolache wrote:
> On 9/20/07, Jim Jagielski <> wrote:
>> On Sep 19, 2007, at 10:55 PM, Bill Barker wrote:
>>> TC 4.1.x and TC 5.5.x represented major changes to the core API, and
>>> resulted in much more stable Tomcat code.  There is no such issue
>>> for TC
>>> 6.0.x (just a disagreement on the comet API, which we have already
>>> dealt
>>> with, and decided to let software-darwinism take it's course).
>> When I suggested a TC 6.0 and 6.5 dual approach, Costin said:
>>    "Strong -1 on this. Done that - didn't work so good, and it
>> doesn't solve
>>    the core problem - it's not about 'cutting edge' versus 'stable',..."
> Context needed :-)
> -1 was on having a TC6.5 as a way to resolve conflicts ( so some people can
> make broad
> changes in one and some in other without having to 'discuss'/argue/veto ).
> The transition between 5.5 to 6.0 ( AFAIK ) was based on '5.5 is mostly
> frozen, only important
> and select changes backported, all new activity on 6.0'.
> I also don't think a 6.5 is needed unless there is no huge architecture and
> API change, as it happened in 5.5->6.0,
well, we have the annotation changes needed for geronimo, that were not 
allowed in 6.0
personally, I think that was enough to keep trunk alive.
Let's say that I did have a huge architecture change, lets say, I want 
to swap out ByteChunk/CharChunk for ByteBuffer/CharBuffer and also use 
nio charset conversion,
then doing that in trunk is not so appropriate either. So I will do that 
in sandbox, the right place for an experiment like that. Maybe it turns 
out that it worked perfectly, and we want to put that into Tomcat, we 
can't put it in 6.0, that would be insane, and we don't have a trunk, so 
where do we put it?

Removing trunk, pretty much halted any chances for future innovation, as 
approved sandbox experiments have nowhere to go.

>  but my 'strong -1' was for the reasons above. I don't mind having a 6.5 -
> if both Remy and Filip and all other
>  people who are actively developing move to 6.5 so changes get the right
> review ( instead of 'that's my branch, that's yours' )
the "my" vs "your" should have never happened, and when those terms were 
coined, they should have been shutdown that very minute.
I never believed in those terms for sure.


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

View raw message