Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Costin Manolache wrote: The problem that I and others have experienced is that proposals and/or patches, by non-committers, don't get discussed or voted about. You have to keep pushing. Well I did, but the next person might not. In that case the community as a whole may miss important feature

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

On 11/12/2002 at 4:03 PM Costin Manolache wrote: >Fredrik Westermarck wrote: > >> The problem that I and others have experienced is that proposals and/or >> patches, by non-committers, don't get discussed or voted about. > >You have to keep pushing. If you send patches and proposals you can >becom

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Fredrik Westermarck wrote: > The problem that I and others have experienced is that proposals and/or > patches, by non-committers, don't get discussed or voted about. You have to keep pushing. If you send patches and proposals you can become a committer - and then you'll start ignoring patches an

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Costin Manolache wrote: Do you actually mean that a new feature will only be added if there is enough committers that need the feature? Does this apply only to 4.1.x? Well... In theory it should apply to all tomcat features, or at least to important ones - they must be first proposed on the lis

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Fredrik Westermarck wrote: > Do you actually mean that a new feature will only be added if there is > enough committers that need the feature? Does this apply only to 4.1.x? Well... In theory it should apply to all tomcat features, or at least to important ones - they must be first proposed on t

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

John Trollinger wrote: Has there or will there be any type of requirement gathering on jspc refactoring. I would like to help refactor this but would like to know what options need to be supported / added and which ones to remove. Everyone has apparently different opinions on what features sh

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Costin Manolache wrote: Glenn Nielsen wrote: >If I understand correctly, what you are saying above is that Tomcat 4 >development should be frozen except for bug fixes and all changes and new >features go in >Tomcat 5? Is that a correct summary? If so I think it is premature to do >so, espec

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Costin Manolache wrote: I consider 4.1.x can recieve bug fixes and minor feature additions (example: the JNDI realm new feature which just got added, optimisations, etc ...), similar to HTTPd 2.0. This is consistent with the patches I and others have been applying, the release process we've been

RE: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Has there or will there be any type of requirement gathering on jspc refactoring. I would like to help refactor this but would like to know what options need to be supported / added and which ones to remove. John -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: F

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Glenn Nielsen wrote: > If I understand correctly, what you are saying above is that Tomcat 4 > development should be frozen except for bug fixes and all changes and new > features go in > Tomcat 5? Is that a correct summary? If so I think it is premature to do > so, especially since a productio

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Remy Maucherat wrote: > I consider 4.1.x can recieve bug fixes and minor feature additions > (example: the JNDI realm new feature which just got added, > optimisations, etc ...), similar to HTTPd 2.0. This is consistent with > the patches I and others have been applying, the release process we've

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Glenn Nielsen wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: > Glenn Nielsen wrote: > > I'm now independent and unemployed, so I'm not aware of the Sun > schedules for the spec anymore :-P Probably within 3-6 months given > J2EE 1.4 is in beta. The rule is we cannot release a stable version of > 5.0.x until the

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Remy Maucherat wrote: Glenn Nielsen wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: > Bill Barker wrote: > > > > I think we have too many dev branches already, and this is causing > maintenance problems. I'd like to have those things go in either 4.1 > or 5.0. Esp the jspc refactoring ;-) jspc is currently broke

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

"Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I'd also like to point out that the servlet API changes are very >>> limited, and it will be possible to use Tomcat 5.0 with the Jasper >>> from Tomcat 4.1. So I think "major" new features should go in the 5.0 >>> codebase. >>> >> >> What is a real

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Jon Scott Stevens wrote: on 2002/11/11 10:10 AM, "Remy Maucherat" wrote: >I'm now independent and unemployed, so I'm not aware of the Sun >schedules for the spec anymore :-P I'm sorry to hear that Remy. Yeah, I miss knowing the schedule ;-) Don't worry too much, I'm on vacation at the mo

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

on 2002/11/11 10:10 AM, "Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm now independent and unemployed, so I'm not aware of the Sun > schedules for the spec anymore :-P I'm sorry to hear that Remy. > Probably within 3-6 months given J2EE > 1.4 is in beta. The rule is we cannot release a stable

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Glenn Nielsen wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: > Bill Barker wrote: > > > > I think we have too many dev branches already, and this is causing > maintenance problems. I'd like to have those things go in either 4.1 > or 5.0. Esp the jspc refactoring ;-) jspc is currently broken in 4.1 > and not real

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Remy Maucherat wrote: Bill Barker wrote: >Based on problems reported by users of JSPC Remy made a proposal >to deprecate it. > >This resulted in a number of people responding that they used JSPC >and strongly felt it should be kept. > >There did seem to be some consensus that JSPC could beneifit

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

Bill Barker wrote: >Based on problems reported by users of JSPC Remy made a proposal >to deprecate it. > >This resulted in a number of people responding that they used JSPC >and strongly felt it should be kept. > >There did seem to be some consensus that JSPC could beneifit from >a review and ref

Re: JSPC refactoring/documentation

- Original Message - From: "Glenn Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 9:44 PM Subject: JSPC refactoring/documentation > Based on problems reported by users of JSPC Remy made a proposal > to deprecate it. > > This resulted in a number of pe