Pier Fumagalli wrote:
I remember perfectly, and this Tomcat-HA was a complete joke. You proposed a new implementation of the Catalina classes, which doesn't make sense given the current Tomcat state (empty promises again, like what we ended up with mod_webapp, which was *the* main reason for many people not to adopt Tomcat 4.x).On 9/12/02 23:58 "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:But in this case you keep making false statements, and not only here. It should be quite easy to look for a [VOTE] or [PROPOSAL] that you made and was voted on tomcat-dev.
I swear that _LOVE_ my mates... My friend Tonia, who's apparently better
than me in getting out old posts, actually _FOUND_ it! :-) Thank you :-) And
for your own viewing pleasure, that's it...
(OK, it didn't have the [PROPOSAL] tag, but the wording was in there,
c'mon, be flexible! :-)
Yes, ok, that's so true... I also vented the idea that _MAYBE_ (but maybe)
someone could have reimplemented the Standard* classes, but WHAT THE HELL?
All I said I wanted was (quote myself) "more or less what Jon does for
Scarab"...
I said that IN JUNE... JUNE for damn sake... And somewhere along this thread
when it after degenerated in the usual flame war that always happens when
something needs to be done you said "If possible, please also change the
name - unless ASF gives you permission to use tomcat name in your product."
And now _I_ am the idiot who makes false statements... Damn... I _knew_ I
had a reason to be upset...
Tonia, thanks, I owe you two favours for this one (next time I'm in the US!)
Pier
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: 5.0 proposal
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 21:49:51 +0100
From: Pier Fumagalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>
That's why counts where not right on my side of the border... I don't recall vetoing the proposal... I just complained vehemently that I'd prefer to see 4.0 out of the door and stable rather than a 4.1 and a 5.0...>4.0 is out of door - the release happened long ago. So did 4.0.1... 4.0.4. 4.1 is getting close - and it should be more stable and better than 4.0.4. And 5.0 should be more stable and better than 4.1 and 3.3. And 6.0 will probably be better than 5.0. If you are interested in maintaining and improving 4.0.4 - just volunteer as release manager for the branch, you have my +1 on it.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 :) 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... Simply, take the Catalina classes, and remove piles of useless stuff (more or less what Jon does for Scarab, but to a greater degree, maybe even reimplementing some of the Standard* classes).
Here, Costin is proposing a new distribution based on the same binary.
Huge difference.
Like the httpd, I'd prefer having a full distribution of all safe (yes, Jasper is safe) and generally useful modules. Experienced users can tweak the configuration to their liking, and it is easy to do, but the beginners get an easy to run environment which does what they need (and obviously a lot more, since you'd want the distribution to fill the needs of 95% of users).
Remy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
