I'm +1 on backport HTTP/2 support to tomcat 8.
I think this should fit into a).

Reasons:
SPDY support has been supported until tomcat 8.0.22, and HTTP/2 is based on 
SPDY,
so there should be no problem at Java language level.

Given that:
1. tomcat 8 has already dropped SPDY support
2. there are more and more web application who is willing to run on HTTP/2
3. tomcat 9 will not be release unless Servlet 4.0 is finalized.

I think we should support HTTP/2 on tomcat 8.

If the Java language level IS a problem, I propose another option:

tomcat 8 WITH HTTP/2 requires to run on JAVA 8.
tomcat 8 WITHOUT HTTP/2 requires to run on JAVA 7.

This is similar to tomcat 7 + web socket support.

Thanks,
Huxing

------------------------------------------------------------------
From:Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org>
Time:2016 Feb 25 (Thu) 21:52
To:Tomcat Developers List <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Subject:Tomcat 8.next


Hi,

This has been hinted at in the past, but is not being discussed anymore.

Possible options:
a) Release a new 8.x branch that would include the connectors from 9 to
support HTTP/2 [OpenSSL now allows realistic support without having to wait
for Java 9], and thus would remove a few legacy items.
b) A more radical option is to use 9 as 8.x but remove the Servlet API
changes. This would force Java 8 and many incompatible changes.
c) Give up on 8.x and instead release 9 as beta, then stable, with an
explicit exception about the Servlet 4 API additions being "preview" until
further notice. That's probably the solution which involves the least
effort by far.
d) Nothing. No 8.x release. 9 will be released sometimes in 2017 when
Servlet 4 is released. The main issue is that there's no HTTP/2 support
until then. The longer we wait, the more a major release will conflict with
the "intuitive" 9 release cycle in 2017.

Comments ?

Rémy

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org

Reply via email to