Fwd: tomcat and ISPs
Begin forwarded message: From: John Nicholas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri Apr 27, 2001 06:26:04 AM US/Pacific To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: tomcat and ISPs Hi Duncan, I'm writing you just because you were the first name on the who we are page on jakarta.apache.org site :) You're probably not the guy to implement this but I'm hoping you know who could. I'm a professional web developer and have been working with Java for a while on my own projects and am really enjoying it. Right now I'm doing a lot of freelance for small companies and agencies and have noticed that it isn't very easy to use servlets in place of PHP or Perl simply because of availability at the hosting service level. I think one of the main reasons PHP is so popular is that almost all hosting services have it. At my level of development (as in customer size), when someone asks me about a project I have to ask what technology their hosting company supports and 90% of the time it's PHP and MySQL. They usually already have a setup they're comfortable with and are unlikely to move to a java friendly host for one project. I think a how-to page for ISPs on how to implement Tomcat in an ISP enviroment would go a long way towards encouraging these guys to add JSP and Servlet support to their product mix. They are almost always Apache shops so I think that Tomcat would be the most natural method for them to use. Thanks, John Nicholas
Re: FYI: Tomcat 4.0 Release Planning Futures
This membership position gives ASF (and the open source developers that ASF represents) a powerful voice in shaping the future of the Java platform. In addition, however, it imposes responsibilities to follow the rules of the Java Community Process -- the same rules that software vendors creating products based on these specifications must follow. Actually, it's not the fact that the ASF is part of the JCP that makes us follow that. The restrictions are placed on anybody who uses the spec by the spec license on the back front page. This means that anybody implementing servlets is required, by "accepting" that license to follow it. At least the way the license is designed. Do not assume that I agree with the way things are -- I'm just reporting my understanding of the way things are set up. .duncan
Re: [advanced-servlets] Session Load Balancing (was: To avoid Duplicate Login)
on 2/26/01 1:58 AM, Pier P. Fumagalli at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really interesting, when thinking about load balancing... By the way, most of the things talked about there *have* been done in one place or another -- though almost always as part of a custom site solution for big sites that do such things as "proprietary trade secrets". Most cases I've seen bury the fact that its being done by using the first x bytes of the cookie to determine session affinity and not using something so obvious as www1:asdf -- the reason they do this isn't to encrypt data, but to keep their competitors to figure out how they get better performance. :) .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson http://x180.net/ !try; do(); - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [report] Classloading problems between Catalina and Cocoon
on 2/27/01 7:57 AM, Pier P. Fumagalli at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, since Forte/NetBeans is now part of Sun, I believe that the best way to go is to have the two teams to talk together (not really easy as I know you're in Czechoslovakia and we are in California :) Duncan, can you help out? I'll see what I can do. Be forewarned, forward progress will take at least a week to start seeing. I'll just liase with a subset of this group though. .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson http://x180.net/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [report] Classloading problems between Catalina and Cocoon
on 2/22/01 8:40 AM, Tom Reilly at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That said, I think javac is never going to be this compiler, at least not any time soon. They just re-wrote it and I doubt they'll do it again. A more mobile open source project like KJC is probably more realistic. There was very high interest at the time that this was percolating around, but if Bill M. has now left, well... Then its a staffing concern. Rgh. I'm still digging, so... -- James Duncan Davidson http://x180.net/ !try; do(); - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [report] Classloading problems between Catalina and Cocoon
on 2/15/01 10:12 AM, Stefano Mazzocchi at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: today's java compilation technology stinks! Or rather, the method of accessing today's Java compiler stinks. Pier and I started talking about a JSR for Java Compilation API months ago and I even wrote a JSR-ignition document but the 'javac' team sucked it, well, I don't know anything about it. I'll check up on this. -- James Duncan Davidson http://x180.net/ !try; do(); - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Status Report: Sealing Violation Problems With Xerces
on 2/7/01 6:05 PM, Craig R. McClanahan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those interested in the gory details, the problem is in StandardClassLoader.findClass(), which delegates to the parent class loader prior to checking the local repositories (I'm not sure this is really correct behavior -- hence the need for some research). Consider a class like org.xml.sax.EntityResolver, which correctly exists in both Xerces and Crimson. If the Crimson version of this class is loaded first, any attempt to load other org.xml.sax.* classes from Xerces will fail with a package sealing exception, because crimson.jar is sealed. By default, the behavior recommended by the docs -- and the one exhibited here is correct for most cases as the classes that implement the same "name" should be in totally different class loaders that are siblings and are not in a parent-child relationship. The problem that you describe here is symptomatic of some sort of parent-child relationship where differing classloaders are resolving sometimes to the same classloader and sometimes to different classloaders (often seen when there are subtle versioning differences). At least that's my two cents from having been around the class loader block a few times. .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson http://x180.net/ !try; do(); - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PROPOSAL] Tomcat 3.3 Release Plan
On 1/24/01 10:49 AM, "Jon Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 1/24/01 10:06 AM, "Larry Isaacs" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It should be noted that when this plan comes up for a vote, a +1 by a committer will constitute a commitment not only to helping with the release, but to provide maintenance support beyond the release. I'm not sure that I agree with this. What if I want to state my approval, but don't want to help out? +0 it. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Forming an opinion
On 1/22/01 4:16 PM, "Geoff Soutter" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, sounds reasonable. Maybe I ought to be asking how do we protect the people that get offended? :-) Those who need to be protected shouldn't walk outside their front door. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Forming an opinion
at's their business. I wanted to see how far this could go. I get the feeling that we have people "playing chess" with this sort of thing. I'm not happy about that feeling. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Forming an opinion
On 1/20/01 7:56 PM, "James Cook" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think most of us feel that Jon deserves a wrap on the knuckles. :) Not in my charter as I interpret it. Most people here seem to want a fairly low key, laid back PMC. One that deals with focused issues. Everything else happens on the public lists. If anyone made a personal threat, then I would remove them from the lists and rap them on the head and maybe even offer to send lawyers after them, but until that point -- it's in the community's arena to decide. At least this is my opinion after hearing how people want the PMC to run. After all, we say that the ASF pushes down as much power and control to the committers as possible. If you want a stronger PMC influence, then the community has to decide to give the PMC a stronger charter. Or the board does. humor basedon="use of word wrap instead of rap"Though next time I see him, I'll get out the Saran wrap and wrap up his hand.. :)/humor -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting dialins
On 1/20/01 9:56 PM, "David Weinrich" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering if it might be possible to have people reserve spots for the dialin, with committers having priority of course. For some reason I had assumed that the lines would be pretty much tied up ( bad assumption I know ). With most conference systems its hard to reserve slots. The limit on numbers is who you share the passcode with. Jim did asked for a count ahead of time to help plan -- we actually reserved 20 ports. Of which 3 were used. If we had hit max ports during the call, we would have gotten in touch with the operator and increased appropriately. As an alternate idea, a webcast of even just the audio would work fine for me as well...but that is probably a bigger PITA than having the dialin. Anybody who volunteers to set up a webcast for the next meeting is welcome to do so.. :) Or whatever else. I personally can make sure that teleconferences happen. That's about it. For other kinds of collaborative efforts, others are going to have to step forward. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Forming an opinion
On 1/20/01 11:56 PM, "Anil Vijendran" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed, James. I don't really see anyone question Jon's contributions to ASF or to open source, in general. Jon is prolific and that's great. But many posts from Jon "cross the line" and are harrassment. A small bit of toning down would go a long way. I should have been more clear -- legally defined harassment. Threats to body or property come to mind. Stalking. Not being a lawyer I don't know what else the ASF could be considered to be liable for (and of course it depends on what a jury thinks), however in my opinion it has to be this serious for official action to be taken. After all, it seemed clear to me that the PMC's role was too narrowly defined to include "niceness overseers". If you have a beef with Jon's behavior, then voicing it here, or to him personally, is the appropriate thing to do. Or if you want the PMC's charter expanded, that's something that can be discussed. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting dialins
On 1/21/01 11:28 AM, "Shawn McMurdo" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A reservation system or even an informal "who's planning on dialing in" query on the list before the meeting can give the community and the organizers a good feel for whether there is room for casual observers or whether more ports are needed. We did request that info. :) I'm sorry that my wording of the message gave people the idea that they weren't welcome to call in.. I was unsure of what kind of response we'd get since we didn't have a very good feedback to Jim's mail -- and I also figured that if you really wanted to call in, you'd do so anyways. :) -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Call for volunteers
On 1/19/01 12:17 PM, "Hans Bergsten" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Based on the number of answers I've seen so far, I assume that it will be put up for a vote soon. I ask, however, that you wait with that until we have an agreement on how to interpret our decision guidelines (or amend them if needed) for a vote on a Release Plan. I want to avoid a "Florida recount situation", where the rules are being made up while the votes are counted ;-) Agreed. I don't want to debate about hanging chads. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Catalina + Apache
On 1/19/01 2:03 PM, "Jon Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 1/19/01 12:21 PM, "Craig R. McClanahan" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know Pier has a bunch of bugfixes currently in his local CVS tree, so hopefully we will be much closer to the "reality" end of the scale soon. Why isn't development happening in public? Having local CVS tree does not encourage community development. Before anybody gets freaked out :) there's not an "internal to Sun" CVS tree. I'm sure that Craig meant that they were in Pier's checked out sandbox. As to why Pier hasn't been checking in code more often, that's a different story. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Clarification of PMC emails
On 1/18/01 6:27 PM, "Timm, Sean" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this something that needs to be addressed on a per-project level basis, or is this a new policy handed down from the ASF? I'd be interested in seeing this happen on xml.apache.org as well... It's something that needs to happen with the XML project. However PMCs are given a fair amount of latitude currently by the ASF to run things how they perceive best. Given that, it's hard to tell. You should bring this up on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list :) .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release of 3.3
On 1/18/01 12:30 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. It seems he made a distinction between +1 ( I support the plan or release ) and "commited" +1 ( I support the plan _and_ I commit to help). 3. My vote will be a "commited" +1. My reading of the situation is that if you vote +1, that's a commitment to help, not just support of the plan. Support of the plan is a +0. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Forming an opinion
On 1/18/01 2:49 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To be clear, I am fed up that Jon: - tells everybody what they should do; - judges and condemns people without knowing how their lives are (as with, but not only, the several remarks about people not dialing-in in the PMC meeting); - makes dirty insinuations about others professional lives; - flames people; - bullies people; - etc. Jon isn't the most polite of people sometimes, but he does have valid concerns wrt stability and following the rules that we have at the ASF. If you disagree with what somebody says, it is easy to just say that they aren't making sense. It takes two to fight, and you are doing more than your share. As far as the dial-ins -- I'm disappointed as well that they were not as well used as they could have been. Real money was spent in order to set up that conference call and it doesn't bode well that it was barely used. I understand it wasn't perfect and in the future we need to entertain ideas of how to do this better. But, we can't perform *all* communication via email -- and knowing people face to face *so* improves communication. We'll have to work on this... However, if you feel that strongly, you could have asked about us dialing you or any number of alternatives... Nobody asked about this during the set up so I assumed that the call-in setup was going to be good. He always wants to have the last word. Usually (because he is part of the clique?) no one asks him to stop. So, this time, I have just kept answering to him to see what happens. Jon was around since *way* back in Jserv days. Does that make him part of the clique? Probably. Face it, cliques happen. Open Source is built on trust more than anything else and Jon has built up more Open Source projects than I can keep track of. I won't ask Jon to stop arguing just like I won't ask Costin or Craig. It may more may not be constructive, but email is the mechanism that we have and flames are par for course. The point at which to ask people to stop is when posts cross the line and become "harassment". It surprises me that, instead of asking Jon (the PMC member that should set the example) to stop, you are asking me. So as a PMC member, he shouldn't voice an opinion? That's akin to what I've been told that as PMC chair, I have to put my opinions aside. That of course is utter bs. If you're on the PMC, it's because you are supposed to *have* an opinion. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stay Tuned...
I've been a bit silent in these days after the PMC meeting.. I've been preparing for a big trip to Dublin/Prague/NYC+LinuxWorld over the next two weeks. Luckily I'll be stuck on a plane for 10 hours later today and will be catching up with all email. Replys will flow in from Dublin. :) Just FYI -- I hate being silent for too long.. :) Also, if anybody in Dublin/Prague/NYC would like to get together and chat, my schedule may permit such meetings (over beer of course!). Send me private mail if you are interested and we'll see what can happen. .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why are we still using JAXP and ProjectX???(proprietary==evil)
On 1/8/01 9:31 AM, "Sam Ruby" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO, we should have a cleanroom re-implementation of this important API. If the current codebase in Apache doesn't meet this criteria, this problem should be addressed ASAP. The implementation in the current Xerces tree is a fine clean room impl of this. However do we really want to have more than one impl? Especially since these classes go directly into JDK 1.4? I would hate to see a code versioning problem around this from a technical standpoint. For the life of me, I can see no reason why the JAXP JSR community wishes to remain a PITA in this matter. It should follow the lead of the servlet JSR. What's particularly puzzling about this to me is that the enlightened individual that took that JSR fully open source leads the JAXP JSR... I don't get to call all the shots all the time. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why are we still using JAXP and ProjectX???(proprietary==evil)
On 1/3/01 10:24 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why are we using JAXP and ProjectX which are both Closed Source and proprietary to SUN Microsystems. This is a Bad Thing. We already have an awesome XML parser and I would say just *drop* the abstraction... not worth the loss of Freedom :(. Then why are you using Java which is composed of code most of which isn't under a free license and is proprietary to either Sun and/or its partners? Is that worth the loss of Freedom? Having a problem with Project X doesn't mean scrapping the use of JAXP -- esp since two implementations of the parser and the impl of the transform engine is under the ASF license. Or should we just hard code the dependencies and not let people choose which parser to use? -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licensing / Source Question
On 12/28/00 10:41 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - do you want to check in all the code ? It isn't bad, but maybe it would be a better idea to check in only a subset - or move the utils in a different top-level directory. Unless it is contributed to the ASF -- and the ASF accepts, it's *much* better to check in a .jar file. Very much cleaner from a legal standpoint. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TC 4.0 vs. TC 3.x and division of labor
On 12/28/00 11:29 PM, "Remy Maucherat" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting James Duncan Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sideline this *now*. This will get discussed at the PMC meeting. Can non-PMC members like myself attend this ? Yep. It will be an open meeting. Phone dialups are going to be investigated. .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TC 4.0 vs. TC 3.x and division of labor
On 12/29/00 4:33 AM, "Paulo Gaspar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Duncan. I am in a different time zone and I reply to mails by the date order they were sent. (That is how you got a batch of replies from me altogether.) Cool enough. I should have been a bit clearer that I wasn't just trying to say to you "knock it off" -- more like "just because there's mail here still coming in on the topic, please don't make more" which is aimed at everyone in general and nobody in particular. -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JMX to build TC 4.0 m5
On 12/29/00 12:04 PM, "Jon Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yea, it denied my Berkeley, CA address at one point. :-) Yep. No way to map IP's to physical location except by top level ISPs -- and then only sortof. :) .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Session Serialize code
On 12/29/00 6:35 PM, "Jon Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the server crashes, then you are screwed either way. If you are live, then serializing/deserializing the sessions for each and every request could be a major slowdown (even with this code). This is why there still isn't a good session server available. :-) Database folks will argue that the best session server would have a database as a back end. After all -- databases have to solve problems of both speed and safety as well. Of course going through SQL and an access API nukes out some advantage. :) But without a lot of work (of which this looks like a pretty damn good start), they are most likely right. When session support was put into the servlet api, this was one of the things that was debated. There's really no good answer except: use sessions for data you don't mind getting splatted in a pinch, or that you won't do anything more than annoy if it goes splat (loosing a shopping cart even is annoying, but not totally reprehensible as long as you have 99.9% updtime). Data that has to be preserved has to go into a database or an EJB. Anything involving money for sure. :) -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Session Serialize code
On 12/30/00 6:00 AM, "Kief Morris" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It doesn't need to. I'm writing PersistentManager to put the session on a queue to be serialized by another thread. This shouldn't have a noticeable performance impact. At least on a machine that is not totally tweaked out and running under heavy load. Moving the performance hit around works until your site gets pounded every time your company's commercial gets played during the super-bowl :) .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson[EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do() - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tomcat 4 vs Tomcat 3 Discussions
I think that this has gone about as far as it can productively go in email. I'd like to ask *all* participants in this discussion to cool it until Tuesday January 16th when you can voice your opinions at the Jakarta PMC meeting. Normally, I would prefer to actually try to reach some sort of resolution via email as that is what typically works for this community. However, it is clear from the length of time that these threads have been going on that it isn't going to happen. It's time to get out the not very used "the buck stops here" PMC big stick. The meeting will be in the Bay Area. Details will follow a bit closer to time as will an overall agenda. However, this topic will be one of the big agenda items and we *will* address it at that meeting even if we are ordering in Chinese food for dinner and pizza for a midnight snack. Until then I'd like to request that both sides draw a line, stay to their side of the road, do their thing, and figure out what they want to say at that meeting. James Duncan Davidson Jakarta PMC Chairman
