On Saturday 05 February 2005 22:43, you wrote: > In my case "something" is: i feel that contributing into AOLServer > project feels like asking permission from AOL, is AOL willing to accept > or even consider whatever additions i am offering. In most case they > will be rejected because of stability, direction, code style or pure > "messed up code". I understand that AOL pays core developers but i think > this is what makes me feel this is not open-source project, this is AOL > project with open sources. It is not bad and AOL benefits from this > greatly, so many free QA/testers but still, AOLserver goes in the > direction at least i do not agree with.
Hm... for quite some time I'm happening to have the similar feeling. Glad I'm not alone. > I think AOLServer should not be pure webserver, just another webserver > even running by AOL, still just another webserver, it has potential to > be full-blown application server. Oh yes! See, our app is written entirely arround it and the web-part is about 20% of the total (the web-based config GUI). All other is combination of C/Tcl modules. It is well suited for what we're doing because of the speed of C and ease of development in Tcl. We considered writing our own app-server way back in 1999 but then AS got open-sourced. This saved us lots of time and trouble. Since then I'm trying to help with the project to give something in return. I would also love to see this project evolves since we're betting our company on it. I also think (we have proved it) that AS can be a very powerful application server. It would be the pitty to neglect this potential. Sure would be a huge problem for us. > > I support my patches and develop different version of aolserver, > allowing differnet protocols, for example HTTP or SIP over UDP, but i am > sure AOL will not accept them, so i keep them to myself. There are many > small improvements can be done and i 've done a lot of them, binder for > example, many modules. They are public but still, core is what AOL provides. > > I am not saying the word "fork", but it may happen. I think this is because of the vision: some people want to see AS like a web-server only, other people want to do, in addition, all sorts of other tasks with it since the thing *could* support that easily, by tweaking a piece here/there. There are some RFE's in the SF area on this. Admitently, most of the people (including AOL) are interested in web-part only (for whatever reasons) and this is where most of the new developments are made. I believe there has to be a *critical* mass to influence the vision. I find the Torben's idea of an alternate AS version interesting. But, hey, wouldn't that be a fork you're talking about? We are all interested in stability. I'm paranoic about it. But I miss the new-ideas-playground which may open whole lot of new options. Zoran -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
