> No. What I am saying is that as a group, we choose to go in a certain
> direction and voted on it (with zero -1's).
>
> Let me refer you to this link (again):
>
> <http://w6.metronet.com/~wjm/tomcat/2000/Aug/index.html#00195>
You can also try reading:
http://www.x180.net/Mutterings/Apache/rules.html
To quote:
2) When a revolution is ready for prime time, the committer proposes a
merge to the -dev list. At that time, the overall community evaluates
whether or not the code is ready to become part of, or to
potentially replace the, trunk. Suggestions may be made, changes may be
required. Once all issues have been taken care of and the merge is
approved, the new code becomes the trunk.
Is the mail you are pointing on the announcement that Catalina is "ready
for prime time" ? It looks like a repetition of the original proposal that
Craig submited one year ago ( i.e. "Tomcat.Next").
Was the discussion that followed "the community evaluating whether or not
the code is ready to become part of ..." ?
> Now, he wants to go against what everyone voted for by continuing on with
> the development of Tomcat 3.x indefinitely. I'm going to call him on that
Besides the people who were working on Tomcat4, the only commiters that
voted +1 are Duncan and Hans.
Also Alex, who withdrawled his -1 saying ( if you read his mail ):
" True enough; my point was simply that people who want 2.3, but don't
want to change to Catalina, won't have to (since Tomcat 3.x will
support the latest and greatest specs too)"
Are you saying that a proposal that got 6 commiter votes ( which happen to
be the full PMC, except Sam, plus Remy ) are representing the whole
project ?
Are you saying that the proposal meant to replace 3.x with 4.0 ? When 4.0
was still 6 months away from alpha ?
> because I don't see that as being right. I also don't see a problem with
> questioning the fact that he has completely ignored what we have voted on
> (to the point where he didn't even vote himself!). I don't understand how
Since that didn't looked like " Catalina is ready, we have facts to show,
not only words " - no, I didn't, and it seems at that time very few people
were interpreting that proposal the way you imply now. I din't - it was
just a repetition of what happened in December 99 - and calling it
".next" didn't worked too much then, the same for calling it "4.0" now.
Quick poll - how many of you ( who voted or not at that time ) read the
proposal as "3.x development should stop, Catalina has proven to be
better" ?
How many of you can name the fundamental differences between
tomcat3 and catalina and explain why one choice is better ( not to mention
that tomcat3.3 supports valves ).
How many spent time reading 4.0 and 3.3 and believe that 4.0 is indeed
simpler, better or faster ?
And how many commiters ( including Hans and Duncan ) did stoped working on
3.x and started working on 4.0 ?
Does it looks like a "project decision" ?
> you all can accept Costin's lone wolf mentality when this is supposed to
> really be a community effort.
Yes, this is supposed to be a community effort - and it has been so far.
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
