> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans Bergsten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2000 00:34
>
> Regarding the proposed changes, I'm +0. I'd like to see 3.3 (or ideally it
> should be called 3.2.x if you decide to start from scratch with the 3.2
> base) as the continuation of 3.2, with focus on bug fixes and minor
> improvements (e.g. performance, admin, etc.) in support of the
> 2.2/1.1 APIs
> as opposed to refactoring to a completely new architecture. From the mails
> on this list, it seems like the majority wants a stable 3.2.x code base
> that's good enough to be used in production. Another important reason
> to keep the basic architecture intact is to give people a chance to learn
> how it works and be able to contribute to the 3.2.x code base. If it keeps
> changing, there will be very few that has the time to keep up.
I am one of the guys that wants a stable production solution. BUT most
(all?)
of the changes that Costin lists:
1. Simplify code;
2. Improve modularity;
3. Fix functionality.
3 has to be done in order to have a production product that behaves has
expected according to the Servlet standard version it implements.
1 and 2 always pay-off quite fast in terms of maintenance and code reuse.
And this is important because:
- Tomcat will always have some maintenance work to be done while it is a
production product. So, it would be better to freeze it at a more
maintainable form;
- Tomcat is a product that tends to be reused quite often in other
products.
Examples I know better: Borland's JBuilder 4 and Oracle's JDeveloper 3.
And let's consider this factors:
a) It is still not clear when will Catalina be production ready - one can
never be 100% sure about such things before they are done.
HOWEVER most of the work on 3.3 and most of the 3.2 bug fixes are done.
This makes merging them and getting 3.3 production ready a much more
predictable task than getting Catalina/4.0 there;
b) And then, Costin wants to do most of the work!
So, why not taking advantage of b) to reach the advantages of the better
and easier to maintain 3.3 that, according to a), is "more sure" to be
there soon than 4.0?
Conclusion:
- Costin is doing most of the work;
- His changes really look to be an improvement;
- And if he is wrong (which I doubt) everybody can stick with 3.2 until
4.0, even if having to make minor (3.3.x?) fixes...
- ...since no one else looks to be willing to do all the stuff that
Costin wants to take care of, anyway.
(BOTTOM LINE: let's take advantage of Costin! (o;=
He is also having his fun!)
> > - consolidation/refactoring of all tomcat-independent and
> general-purpose/
> > reusable code into org.apache.tomcat.util.[log, etc ]
> >
> > - new utils
>
> If they are truly reusable (e.g. used in both Tomcat and Jasper), wouldn't
> org.apache.util be a better package name?
Wouldn't that be a bit intrusive and demand for agreement with other Apache
projects?
Have fun,
Paulo
