tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: EL and JSP 2.1
Date Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:18:33 GMT
Hi,
I'm actually +1 to more or less everything Costin said ;)
Yoav

On 1/6/06, Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/27/05, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:
> > My own views in line.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > Jacob Hookom wrote:
> > >
> > >>I'd like to get the ball rolling on a branch for JSP 2.1.
> > >
> > > I can get the SVN stuff set up over the next few days. There has been
> > > some debate about how we arrange things so we need to get agreement on
> > > the way forward.
> > >
> > > The key questions are:
> > >  - does 6.0.x become the main development branch?
> > Yes. We did this for 5.5.x and it worked.
>
> Yes, you'll need to create a branch for 5.5.
>
>
> >
> > >  - do we merge jasper and container?
> > No. Good to keep them independent.
>
> The independence is not given by the fact they are in different trees - the
> connector and container are not independent, yet in different trees.
>
> And the 'separation' of jasper and container can be achieved as well
> by continuing to use
> differet packages :-).
>
>
> > >  - do we merge build and container
> > Maybe. If someone wants to take the time to do this and update the
> > build scripts great. Personally, not an itch I feel the need to scratch.
>
> Probably doesn't make sense if this is the only change.
>
> It seems people are not ok with a single source tree.
>
>
> >
> > >  - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?
> > No for the api stuff proper. We don't host it, can't change it and our
> > own implementation would be more trouble than it is worth.
> >
> > Maybe for the examples. It is useful to be able to fix problems with
> > them. The examples could always be merged in with the container module.
>
>
> IMO - 6.0 would be the best chance to reorg the tree structure. Given
> that JDK1.5 will be required, it means we could remove all <1.4 code
> and hacks, and a lot of the build hacks that are used to deal with
> multiple VMs and options.
>
> I think we should just create a tomcat6/ repository, and then take a
> snapshot of all subtrees
> in the current tomcat and place the all in the same tree, under
> tomcat6/java. Then start with a fresh build.xml - excluding or
> removing the 1.1 - 1.4 support classes.
>
> Well - I would go even further, on creating a smaller number of jars
> for the distribution, but I guess that would be even less popular than
> the singe tree.
>
> I do understand I'm in a very small minority with this proposal, just
> want to have it on the record  :-)
>
> Costin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>


--
Yoav Shapira
System Design and Management Fellow
MIT Sloan School of Management
Cambridge, MA, USA
yoavs@computer.org / www.yoavshapira.com

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


Mime
View raw message