Glenn Nielsen wrote: > "Craig R. McClanahan" wrote: > >>On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Glenn Nielsen wrote: >> >> >>>[snip] >>>Providing a great java web server is not a goal of Tomcat. >>>[snip] >> >>I didn't know cats could talk :-). >> >>I didn't know that Glenn, or Pier, or any single developer, speaks for the >>entire Tomcat developer community. >> > > > Ok, I phrased that wrong. Of course I don't speak for the entire Tomcat > developer community. I have been involved in this community for > over 2 years and I have never seen "Providing a great java web server" > proposed as a Tomcat feature or even discussed. If you and Remy have that > as a goal, great! I personally wouldn't list that as a very high priority. > > >>This statement (a great java web server) has always been one of my >>personal goals for Tomcat. People who use the current generation web >>connectors (unless they really do need it for the performance) have to be >>a little masochistic to put up with the configuration and admin quirks >>(although they are getting less onerous). >> >>But that doesn't mean I'm going to suggest that the connectors be kicked >>out just because *I* don't care about them. >> > > > I didn't say kick them out, I said put them in their own repository, > like jakarta-tomcat-connectors and Coyote is right now. > > >>>I have no use for things like SSI, CGI, or WEBDAV either. In fact >>>it would be nice if these three items were moved to another repository >>>so that they could have separate release cycles. >>> >> >>Repositories being the same or different doesn't have anything to do with >>release cycles -- that's an issue of how you choose to package the output. >> >> >>>What I am interested in is a reliable standards compilant application server >>>that has the features I need for virtual hosting customer applications using >>>Apache as the web server. Tomcat 4.1 is getting very close to meeting those >>>needs. Performance is important, but secondary to reliablity and features. >>> >> >>That's a perfectly valid need. So's the need for something you can >>install on a PC and get the "Hello, World" example up and running in three >>minutes or less after you've downloaded it. So is the need to have a >>server that is portable across environments that nobody is bothering to >>support native connectors for, but has a JVM. To say nothing of the need >>to embed HTTP support in other Java server applications. And also the >>need to have a servlet/JSP development platform that lets me turn around >>my compile-debug cycles without starting the server every single time. To >>say nothing of small-to-medium scale websites that don't get 8 million >>hits per day, and Tomcat is "fast enough" even if it isn't "fastest >>possible". >> > > > Gee, you must have missed where I said "Its nice that Tomcat supports HTTP, > this makes setting up a development environment easier.". When I stated > that I had all of the above in mind (except small to medium size websites). > Based on my experience using Tomcat in production, I would want a solid > web server like Apache in front of Tomcat to serve static content reliably. > I am not masochistic enough to use Tomcat as the HTTP server for a site I > am responsible for 7x24 coverage for. > > >>Tomcat can meet all of those needs, but only if the developers are >>unselfish enough to understand that "I don't need that feature" does *not* >>mean "it should not be there at all". Such selfishness has not >>historically been a part of Apache culture in the five or so years I've >>been around -- I'd hate to see it start here and now. >> > > > Craig, I applaud your vision and leadership with catalina. You did a > great job. :-) > > I thought the ASF was about creating a community (meritocracy) where > proposals, ideas, directions, and code can be discussed openly and the > validity of them could be challenged. So that only the best ideas rise > to the top. When did this get redefined to mean selfish? > > I see the proposal for a major new revision of Tomcat as a watershed event. > It should be a time for the tomcat community to do some introspection of > where Tomcat currently is and what direction it should go in the future. > The process of discussing this might be messy but hopefully in the end > what will be left is a well thought out proposal that most everyone can > agree with.
We did, and apparently, there are 3 people disagreeing with the new proposal (one of whom because he just doesn't care, to quote his own words). So I think this is pretty good, and definitely a lot better than the level of "community bonding" that was achieved for the 4.0 proposal ;-) I'll make some slight changes to the proposal to make it a bit more precise on what changes will be included. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
