Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 57958 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2006 20:19:03 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Jan 2006 20:19:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 6349 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2006 20:18:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 6301 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2006 20:18:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 6290 invoked by uid 99); 6 Jan 2006 20:18:57 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:18:56 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of yoavshapira@gmail.com designates 64.233.162.197 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.162.197] (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.197) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:18:54 -0800 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i28so3771726nzi for ; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:18:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=lt1mAuhcVbOOSb2/A2f4B0SvMqy32tPlSlDCz0YfdjPQF4EhqdZZO+E1ToEl40Ein9FWTkKgrNrPvENQAmYeGC8guhosP8xJEDINhfZr01UbrTkafvhjRPxAR0ICQEW4tFWGb2oTW145jW3pBKHolKvcadj0/xInDLYKKmvPYDE= Received: by 10.64.149.8 with SMTP id w8mr24311qbd; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:18:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.180.20 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 12:18:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:18:33 -0500 From: Yoav Shapira Sender: yoavshapira@gmail.com To: Tomcat Developers List , costin@apache.org Subject: Re: EL and JSP 2.1 In-Reply-To: <96e4b5230601061003q373b13efgcb94329e326cd079@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <43B08F14.9050500@hookom.net> <43B1CCC5.7000907@apache.org> <43B1CFAB.8070808@apache.org> <96e4b5230601061003q373b13efgcb94329e326cd079@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, I'm actually +1 to more or less everything Costin said ;) Yoav On 1/6/06, Costin Manolache wrote: > On 12/27/05, Mark Thomas 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 o= n > > > 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 - t= he > 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