tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John Lockwood" <>
Subject RE: The plans are to cut a final release of 3.1 this week...
Date Tue, 04 Apr 2000 20:44:24 GMT
Hi Gal,

I know you guys really are interested in our feedback, more so than I ever
am when all work and no money make Jack a dull boy.  Also I really didn't
want to make it sound like if it didn't do it in this release I'd take the
no money I ever paid you and go home <g>.  I really do think you guys have a
first rate product here, and I appreciate all your work on it.

I think doing the User's Guide first was a great idea.  The worst thing this
product would be to have it be another obtuse, undocumented, hard-to-fathom
piece of UNIX arcania.  MySQL is to me a great example of an open-source
product that's a no-brainer to install and configure, and the reason is the
RPMs and the docs.  Knowing that this product is moving in the MySQL
direction and not the vi --
"thine-keystrokes-depend-upon-mine-toggled-state-which-I-shall-not-reveal" -
- direction is definitely the right thing.

I apologize for not bringing up virtual hosting earlier myself, but I just
started working with the product at all during the 3.1 beta.  Also, sorry
not to do more pounding on the product without it, but I'm busy hunting up
my next contract and trying to get my own site running better to really be a
great early adopter.  But I do appreciate your efforts.  Honest.  I'm not
just saying that to make you code faster. ;-)

And with that, enough schmooze and on to substance....

Thanks again,


-----Original Message-----
From: Shachor Gal []
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 11:28 AM
Subject: RE: The plans are to cut a final release of 3.1 this week...

> >>
> >> 1) Scalability broblem with virtual hosting
> > Have the specific issues been identified and reported?
> It's mentioned in the User's Guide.

The scalability problem that is associated with the virtual hosts was
identified at about the same time when I started to write the user's
We found about it late because up until then nobody asked for virtual
hosts and our user oriented "alarm clock" was off :(.

By this time we were to late in the process to fully implement virtual
hosts in Ver3.1! Full virtual hosts implementation will require:
1. Per virtual host loggers.
2. Per virtual host interceptors.
3. Per virtual host webapps/work... directories.
4. Improved SimpleMapper.
5. Modified Server.xml (and it's parsing) with support for the above.
6. Web server plugin support.

After a few (private) discussions with some of the development team
(time/work assessments...) it was clear that if we want to have a tested
implementation we should postpone virtual hosts to the next *dot* release.

At a certain point in time I actually wanted to work on the virtual hosts
problem but not enough users asked for this feature and for me it was
either writing a user's guide or implementing some improved virtual hosts
I chose the user's guide (was I wrong?).

> So the real problem for those of you working for free is to ask us what we
> think and then make believe you care, and the real problem for those of us
> taking advantage of you is to ask you politely for single-process virtual
> host support while at the same time telling you what a fine outstanding
> product you have, there, fella, and how much we really like you. ;-)

We *do* care and we may need to have some mechanism that let the users
vote for their favorite feature (anyone volunteer to organize tom-dollars
and a voting site?). Also, if you need something (and you do no see
in the plan file) letting us know about this *early* in the development
process is really going to help.

	Gal Shachor

To unsubscribe, email:
For additional commmands, email:

View raw message