On Oct 20, 2010, at 5:03 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 20/10/2010 06:39, Jess Holle wrote: >> On 10/20/2010 5:45 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> On 19/10/2010 08:56, Mark Thomas wrote: >>>> Ping. Just a gentle reminder that there are ~2 days left for this vote. >>>> So far we have 1 vote for beta and no other votes. >>> Sorry - it should have said ~1 day above. I've been traveling and got my >>> dates mixed up. I'll leave the vote open for another 24 hours or so. >>> >>> Currently there are 4 votes for beta (2*PMC, 1*committer, 1*contributor) >>> so we need at least 1 more PMC vote in order to proceed with this >>> release. >> As someone trying to figure out when to take the plunge into Tomcat 7, >> but needing something that is definitely "stable", is there any sort of >> list as to what hurdles remain to be cleared before considering Tomcat 7 >> is considered "stable"? > > My own view is that to be considered stable, Tomcat 7 needs to meet the > following criteria: > 1. Implement all aspects of Servlet 3.0, JSP 2.2, EL 2.2 > 2. Pass all unit tests with all three HTTP connectors > 4. Pass all relevant TCKs with the security manager enabled > - Servlet TCK with all three HTTP connectors and both AJP connectors > - JSP TCK with any connector > - EL TCK (doesn't use web requests) > 4. Have no 'significant' open bugs > 5. Have reasonable adoption > 6. Have a couple of releases with no 'serious' bugs emerging > > In term of progress: > 1. Done (to the best of my knowledge).
I don't think tomcat is processing security constraints added through ServletRegistration. I added some hooks in one of my patches so the info got to an appropriate class but only implemented the actual processing in geronimo. see https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50015 thanks david jencks > 2. It does. > 3. It does (as have all 7.0.x releases). > 4. There is currently 1 (yes one!) open bug without a patch across > 5.5.x, 6.0.x and 7.0.x so I think we can call this one done. > 5. Based on some analysis of download requests and the number and > quality of bug reports I am happy that there is reasonable adoption at > this stage. > 6. I see this as the only thing between 7.0.x and stability. > > Serious is subjective but the sort of things I would include are: > - anything that requires a major refactoring to fix > - anything that breaks typical use cases > > As an example, I would consider another bug 49884 serious due to both > the async issues it caused and the scale of the refactoring required to > fix. I wouldn't consider another 50072 serious mainly because that issue > has been present in the 6.0.x code base and hasn't been a problem (at > least not one folks have reported). > > So in summary, if 7.0.4 and 7.0.5 go well, things are looking good for > 7.0.6. > > HTH, > > Mark > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
