Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev -
I wholeheartedly agree with this. MinTC issues are not discussed around
here, while I would love to follow its development (darn, not enough time?).
Actually, I do care _more_ about MinTC than even Tomcat itself, as the "new
features" of 4.0 (and 4.next) are really something I could care less.
On this same thread, I don't see many issues related to Tomcat itself
discussed on this list (sometimes I do post about some, but it _really_
looks like that my posts are redirected to /dev/null - for instance, see my
post about extension-case matching on MacOS/X... NOONE replied, not even
cared to ask "Since you run OS/X everywhere, can you find a fix" or some
things like that.
> I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been
> very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only
> one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications.
>
> If the Tomcat project wants to provide MinTC, it has to be as a proposal for
> Tomcat 5.
>
> Note: MinTC is not the same as Catalina. It just happens to use the same
> interfaces. It is otherwise a completely different implementation.
Correct. In fact MinTC is _not_ Tomcat, not even an ASF project, but since
it's so closely tied to our baby, I appreciate the fact that Chris is
keeping us informed....
I strongly disagree with you, Remy, especially for the tone you used in your
private email to Chris. I might be a f***ed up flamethrower, but I try to be
politically correct. Before going out "impersonating" the Tomcat-DEV
community, I would have preferred you asked (at least) some of your mates
over there at Sun (like Craig, who's also an ASF member).
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
