Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
+1 On Oct 30, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Jean-Francois Lamy wrote: I still don't see why old config files stop working. I can still configure Log4j using log4j.properties even though there are newer/better config file formats. Config files for production sites are tricky, and testing them is very painstaking. The pain factor for people that manage many sites is quite high. Jean-François Lamy Teximus C : +1 514 992-2759 -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Riccardo Cohen Envoyé : 30 octobre 2008 05:14 À : General Discussion for the Resin application server Objet : Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? I must admit that there are some non-compatible changes in the config, AND the Api (in particular ejb syntax). But from my point of view, this comes because Caucho provide tools really efficients before they are completely defined by the community. There is good and bad in everything. I never found difficult to upgrade, except that it costs... for all the changes we have to make, and the time to find the new syntax. This process have been difficult for me because it was at a time where the docs were in unstable state. For instance there was a clickable index of config tags in 3.0 documentation, that disappeared for months (no more clickable). Now it's back, and it seems that the new 3.2 doc is really good. Jose Quinteiro wrote: Same here. We're still on 3.0 'cause we haven't found the time to port our configs to 3.1. Just got the 3.0 configs to a point where I liked 'em, too. Saludos, Jose. On Oct 29, 2008, at 5:16 PM, Jean-Francois Lamy wrote: Same here. I don't quite get why the old style files can't be parsed to whatever newfangled data structure is used by the new version, with whatever defaults best approximate the old behaviour. Jean-François Lamy Teximus -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Rob Lockstone Envoyé : 29 octobre 2008 19:43 À : General Discussion for the Resin application server Objet : Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? I'm with you, Leonid! The config file changes from one major release to the next has always been a big pain. I know that some are needed from time to time, but this has often been the biggest hurdle in upgrading for us. We're still on 3.0.x because I haven't yet had the time to vet and apply the significant config file changes between 3.0 and 3.1. 3.2? Forget about it! (Not stable enough for us yet anyway.) Rob On Oct 29, 2008, at 10:44, Leonid Geller wrote: In general I like how 3.2 has fewer jars to go around. Hessian is the exception. It would be nice if all of Hessian code was factored out into a separate library in 3.2.x, so we can drop it into other containers, whether they are applications running 3.1.x or perhaps third party apps like tomcat. Also it appears 3.2 is not backward compatible from config stand- point. It is not enough to simply rename .conf to .xml, some configuration elements that used to be optional are required now. This raises the barrier to upgrade from 3.1.x to 3.2.x -Leonid -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Emil Ong Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:36 PM To: General Discussion for the Resin application server Subject: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your testing include? What features do you like and what would you like to see? I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit. Thanks, Emil ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest -- Riccardo Cohen Architecte du Logiciel http://www.architectedulogiciel.fr +33 (0)6.09.83.64.49 ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
Emil Ong wrote: Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? http://bugs.caucho.com/view.php?id=3013 is a complete show stopper here, so I'm afraid I can't answer these questions as we've not been able to use any version of resin later than 3.1.6. ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 04:55:48PM +, Stargazer wrote: Emil Ong wrote: Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? http://bugs.caucho.com/view.php?id=3013 is a complete show stopper here, so I'm afraid I can't answer these questions as we've not been able to use any version of resin later than 3.1.6. Thanks for the feedback - I bumped up the priority. Just to check, there's some suspicion that this is specific to Apache 2.0 or maybe even 2.0.54. What version of Apache are you running? Any other info you could add to the bug report would also help. Thanks, Emil Emil Ong Chief Evangelist Caucho Technology, Inc. Tel. (858) 456-0300 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.caucho.com/ Caucho: Reliable Open Source -- Resin: application server -- Quercus: PHP in Java -- Hessian Web Services ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
As you may know, http://www.musicalpresence.com is in production with 3.2 All tests have been successful (utf-8, ejb, flex hessian). I kept 3.2 mostly because I needed some correction on hessian with flex. Emil Ong wrote: Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your testing include? What features do you like and what would you like to see? I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit. Thanks, Emil Emil Ong Chief Evangelist Caucho Technology, Inc. Tel. (858) 456-0300 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.caucho.com/ Caucho: Reliable Open Source -- Resin: application server -- Quercus: PHP in Java -- Hessian Web Services ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest -- Riccardo Cohen Architecte du Logiciel http://www.architectedulogiciel.fr +33 (0)6.09.83.64.49 ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
In general I like how 3.2 has fewer jars to go around. Hessian is the exception. It would be nice if all of Hessian code was factored out into a separate library in 3.2.x, so we can drop it into other containers, whether they are applications running 3.1.x or perhaps third party apps like tomcat. Also it appears 3.2 is not backward compatible from config stand-point. It is not enough to simply rename .conf to .xml, some configuration elements that used to be optional are required now. This raises the barrier to upgrade from 3.1.x to 3.2.x -Leonid -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Emil Ong Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:36 PM To: General Discussion for the Resin application server Subject: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your testing include? What features do you like and what would you like to see? I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit. Thanks, Emil Emil Ong Chief Evangelist Caucho Technology, Inc. Tel. (858) 456-0300 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.caucho.com/ Caucho: Reliable Open Source -- Resin: application server -- Quercus: PHP in Java -- Hessian Web Services ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
I'm with you, Leonid! The config file changes from one major release to the next has always been a big pain. I know that some are needed from time to time, but this has often been the biggest hurdle in upgrading for us. We're still on 3.0.x because I haven't yet had the time to vet and apply the significant config file changes between 3.0 and 3.1. 3.2? Forget about it! (Not stable enough for us yet anyway.) Rob On Oct 29, 2008, at 10:44, Leonid Geller wrote: In general I like how 3.2 has fewer jars to go around. Hessian is the exception. It would be nice if all of Hessian code was factored out into a separate library in 3.2.x, so we can drop it into other containers, whether they are applications running 3.1.x or perhaps third party apps like tomcat. Also it appears 3.2 is not backward compatible from config stand- point. It is not enough to simply rename .conf to .xml, some configuration elements that used to be optional are required now. This raises the barrier to upgrade from 3.1.x to 3.2.x -Leonid -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Emil Ong Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:36 PM To: General Discussion for the Resin application server Subject: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your testing include? What features do you like and what would you like to see? I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit. Thanks, Emil ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
Same here. I don't quite get why the old style files can't be parsed to whatever newfangled data structure is used by the new version, with whatever defaults best approximate the old behaviour. Jean-François Lamy Teximus -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Rob Lockstone Envoyé : 29 octobre 2008 19:43 À : General Discussion for the Resin application server Objet : Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? I'm with you, Leonid! The config file changes from one major release to the next has always been a big pain. I know that some are needed from time to time, but this has often been the biggest hurdle in upgrading for us. We're still on 3.0.x because I haven't yet had the time to vet and apply the significant config file changes between 3.0 and 3.1. 3.2? Forget about it! (Not stable enough for us yet anyway.) Rob On Oct 29, 2008, at 10:44, Leonid Geller wrote: In general I like how 3.2 has fewer jars to go around. Hessian is the exception. It would be nice if all of Hessian code was factored out into a separate library in 3.2.x, so we can drop it into other containers, whether they are applications running 3.1.x or perhaps third party apps like tomcat. Also it appears 3.2 is not backward compatible from config stand- point. It is not enough to simply rename .conf to .xml, some configuration elements that used to be optional are required now. This raises the barrier to upgrade from 3.1.x to 3.2.x -Leonid -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Emil Ong Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:36 PM To: General Discussion for the Resin application server Subject: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your testing include? What features do you like and what would you like to see? I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit. Thanks, Emil ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
Same here. We're still on 3.0 'cause we haven't found the time to port our configs to 3.1. Just got the 3.0 configs to a point where I liked 'em, too. Saludos, Jose. On Oct 29, 2008, at 5:16 PM, Jean-Francois Lamy wrote: Same here. I don't quite get why the old style files can't be parsed to whatever newfangled data structure is used by the new version, with whatever defaults best approximate the old behaviour. Jean-François Lamy Teximus -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Rob Lockstone Envoyé : 29 octobre 2008 19:43 À : General Discussion for the Resin application server Objet : Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? I'm with you, Leonid! The config file changes from one major release to the next has always been a big pain. I know that some are needed from time to time, but this has often been the biggest hurdle in upgrading for us. We're still on 3.0.x because I haven't yet had the time to vet and apply the significant config file changes between 3.0 and 3.1. 3.2? Forget about it! (Not stable enough for us yet anyway.) Rob On Oct 29, 2008, at 10:44, Leonid Geller wrote: In general I like how 3.2 has fewer jars to go around. Hessian is the exception. It would be nice if all of Hessian code was factored out into a separate library in 3.2.x, so we can drop it into other containers, whether they are applications running 3.1.x or perhaps third party apps like tomcat. Also it appears 3.2 is not backward compatible from config stand- point. It is not enough to simply rename .conf to .xml, some configuration elements that used to be optional are required now. This raises the barrier to upgrade from 3.1.x to 3.2.x -Leonid -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Emil Ong Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:36 PM To: General Discussion for the Resin application server Subject: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience? Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted Resin 3.1 in production use. If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been? Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your testing include? What features do you like and what would you like to see? I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit. Thanks, Emil ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
