I currently use jetty, and keep it updated internally to track the jetty 6 codebase. I have no problem with it being removed from the framework, as long as we don't assume or require tomcat in the future.
On Mar 20, 2012, at 7:48 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > >> C) $OFBIZ_HOME/debian: move to "Attic" >> >> D) the seleniumxml code in framework/testtools: move to "Attic" >> >> E) specialpurpose/workflow: move to "Attic" >> >> F) specialpurpose/shark: move to "Attic" >> >> J) framework/appserver: move to "Extras" >> >> K) framework/jetty: move to "Extras" (or "Attic") > > The above are components/features that don't seem to be used/maintained by > the community: some of them are very old (workflow, shark, appserver, jetty), > some of them are experimental (shark, seleniumxml), some of them are very > specialized (debian). > I have proposed some of them for the Attic and some of them for the Extras > but in theory all of them could go to Extras if we find at least one > maintainer for each; if not, each of them could go to Attic. > Any ideas? volunteers (OFBiz committers or not)? > No one objected or commented on them so far (so I suspect that there could be > a lazy consensus); for the seleniumxml code there was also a thread some > weeks ago in the user list where there seemed to be a general consensus (also > from the original contributors of the work) for the removal (apart from Hans > who is using it, it doesn't seem to be used much by the community). > > Jacopo >
