Hi, just find that while stopping the server, there is some exceptions about failing to unregister some Tomcat MBeans, I guess that there is still some issues about MBean in Tomcat while I pull the codes. However, I did not think that it is a blocking error. If no objection, I would pass the vote and promote the Tomcat to center repository.
2010/5/6 Rex Wang <[email protected]> > Agree, We can just add a comment in its pom, which records the revision our > external tomcat based on. > > -Rex > > 2010/5/6 Ivan <[email protected]> > > I think that our four version numbers could help us, while Tomcat always >> has three version number. In next iteration, we call our version 7.0.0.1, >> which means more changes are merged from Tomcat 7 dev tree ...... >> >> 2010/5/5 Vamsavardhana Reddy <[email protected]> >> >> >>> >>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Kevan Miller <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On May 4, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Joe Bohn wrote: >>>> >>>> > >>>> > +1 (assuming the potential license issue mentioned below is not an >>>> issue) >>>> > >>>> > I was able to build and run the new tomcat image. >>>> > >>>> > The license issue pointed out last time is now resolved but there is >>>> one other potential issue. I noticed a number of files under jasper-el >>>> that >>>> are generated using JJTree & JavaCC and so have the following header but no >>>> Apache license header. For example: >>>> > >>>> > /* Generated By:JJTree&JavaCC: Do not edit this line. ELParser.java */ >>>> > >>>> > Some other generated files include both a generated header and which >>>> is immediately followed by the Apache license header. This seems a little >>>> better to me. However, I see that we have released these without the >>>> Apache >>>> header in earlier versions (and Tomcat as well) - so I presume there must >>>> be >>>> some valid justification for not including an Apache License header in >>>> these >>>> files. Just pointing it out now in case it really needs some attention and >>>> has just escaped being noticed until now. Comments? >>>> >>>> I've certainly noticed them in the past... Machine generated files do >>>> not require license headers. So, IMO, these files are fine. >>>> >>>> I do have a question about the version #. IIUC, we are releasing 7.0.0 >>>> prior to the TC community. There may be fixes applied to the Tomcat dev >>>> tree >>>> prior to their 7.0 release. So, this release may not exactly match the >>>> functionality of the tomcat release. Is everyone evaluating that in their >>>> decision? >>>> >>>> --kevan >>> >>> >>> I think there are two many zeros in the version number too. How about we >>> use a version number similar to "6.0.18-G678601" like we have in G 2.x >>> builds? >>> >>> -- >>> Vamsi >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Ivan >> > > > > -- > Lei Wang (Rex) > rwonly AT apache.org > -- Ivan
