On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote: > I can't be a RM for 4.0.4 because I would simply remove 70% of the code, and > kiddies would start crying their butts off because they don't have the > manager application, or JSP support :)
I don't think you can remove JSP support - tomcat would no longer be the 'reference impl. for servlets and jsps'. And I don't know why you have to _remove_ stuff that other people need and wrote - simply because you don't need them ? > But if anyone is interested I'd like to explore the opportunity of a > Tomcat-HA (high-availability or hard-edition), based on 4.0 without the > "crap" in there, and straightening out the request-response model... Sure - except the name, which will be 5.0 :-) The whole idea is to improve the modularity of the code ( and the smaller/cleaner request/response/hook model in Coyote is going to help ), and allow more flexibility in configuration/packaging. While the "RI" will likely consist of all the features, it should be easy to remove or replace components you don't need in a particular use-case, and release 'specialised' configuration ( like an 'embeded' edition, 'standalone' or 'integrated', etc ). As I said, tomcat4.0 is out and in 'maintainance' mode ( like tomcat3.2 ). Changing APIs or removing features would require a very serious reason and would most likely be vetoed. Tuning and fixing and making smaller improvements is still possible - as long as the stability of the code is not affected. > > I don't think you can 'veto' a long term plan or release. AFAIK it's > > a majority vote. > > Veto in terms of -1ing it. I think 'veto' has a very specific meaning. ( I'm not an expert in english, but it's not an english word :-) Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
