Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <49D497AF.1060100@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:47:11 +0200
From: Mladen Turk <mturk@apache.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080915)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tomcat Developers List <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Remove older of the two BIO AJP connectors
References: <49CCCBB9.7060206@apache.org>
 <49CCEF1A.8000200@apache.org>	 <49CD3591.6040007@apache.org>
	 <6291fc850903300314s5ae6a462xd389db7d0adf9980@mail.gmail.com>
	 <49D0EC8A.7040906@apache.org>
	 <DB8A1B87-F5A8-43B1-8E31-6908DC652FF1@gmail.com>
	 <49D46F5C.6050009@apache.org>
 <6291fc850904020228o57fbbb0i7935c9b3d41f5ec0@mail.gmail.com>
 <49D48FD5.5060607@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <49D48FD5.5060607@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mark Thomas wrote:
> 
>>>> Asf has a great server framework, mina, but it's not used by Tc.
>>> I'm not sure building Tomcat on top of another framework is a good idea. If you
>>> have a PoC that shows otherwise that would be very interesting.
>> Mina is also ASF and why not speak with the MINA team ?
>> May be they'll more than interesting working on such area.
> Again, if *you* want to pursue this / think this is a good idea - *you* need to
> invest the time to pursue this / persuade others that it is worth them pursuing.
>

The problem with any framework is that with all the benefits
you pay the price. One is that it contain things you will absolutely
never need or use, and the second is that you depend on the
framework, so anything you need to add or fix its other community
dependent. Unless at least three of us become the mina's pmc members
that can push for a release, we would put ourself is the
'plug and pray' situation. However that doesn't prevent anyone
with extra time and will to create the mina based connector,
but of course as a separate module not part of the core.
In time this would eventually lead to satisfying the first requirement,
and eventually use it as core component.

IMHO we had a good example in http-client, where two
communities even under ASF umbrella simply couldn't
cooperate. The guys from http commons simply choose to take a blank
sheet of paper and completely break the backward compatibility,
leaving us sticked to version 3. Of course we could use version
4 (it was beta for how long, two years or more) since now
released, but who can assure us version 4.1 won't make
all our work obsolete again.


And, regarding maven, I absolutely agree with Mark.
There is nothing wrong with ant, and really see no reason
why would the switch be needed.


Regards
-- 
^(TM)

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