Re: [VOTE] Branch j-t-c for Tomcat 5

[Remy Maucherat]

Glenn Nielsen wrote:

Why is it not possible to add (optional) JMX support to j-t-c components so
that we don't have to branch?

I did not say anything about 4.1, just that I feel it is preferable to not
have to maintain two j-t-c code bases.

You can't have everything JMX being optional, it would be just a big mess. Plus, for some changes, it's impossible.

I am a huge +1 on using JMX to capture runtime monitoring data,
but -1 on having two branches to maintain in j-t-c.

I think this is a majority vote. Besides, it was agreed on before that a branch would be created in j-t-c.

Please point me at the previous vote. If we voted and approved branching j-t-c
previously why wasn't it branched then and why are we voting again?

There was no vote, but it was mentioned in Costin's posts (or the replies), when talking about changing Coyote API to something JMX.

The added development overhead is small, and I feel it is needed to keep the 4.1.x tree stable.

Remy


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>