On 23/03/2011 08:33, Simone Tripodi wrote: > Hi all, > sorry to join late the conversation but looks like living in a > different timezone *is* an issue :(
No need to apologise. I wasn't going to go ahead until you had a chance to give your feedback. > I am the person "physically" responsable of the pool2 "big > refactoring" and I would be very sorry to see all that work dropped or > be useless; if you follow the old pool2 discussion in this ML that > drove the refactoring, you would maybe agree that I'm not just a crazy > guy :) I did follow it and I broadly agreed with each of the steps. What I hadn't truly appreciated was how much things had changed and the work that would be required to get a dbcp2 working with it. > BTW I agree with Gary vision, things would have worked simpler just > adding the generics in pool-1.X and releasing as 2.0, then applying > changes/merging fixes step by step, releasing "early and often" > following the XP best practice. I think there is general agreement here that small steps are good. > Can I still be helpful here? I would be much more than happy to use > the pool2 with generics ASAP, so it's part of my interest too :) Absolutely! If we do go down the POOL_FUTURE + backport route I'm sure there will be plenty of discussion about some of the backports as well as the work on dbcp2. Any and all help would be appreciated. If you have any thoughts on the best way to get from where we are to a dbcp2 that uses pool2 where the core pooling code has been updated to take advantage of java.util.concurrent then please do share them. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
