Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Craig R. McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As you will note in this case, and in many others, there is no such thing as the Sun viewpoint on many TOMCAT-DEV issues. And that's appropriate -- we are individuals with our own opinions. I am not going to comment on this as I used to be a Sun employee... Of course, the very same thing can be said about any mythical common ASF Member viewpoint ... :-) Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you on this one: the mythical ASF Membership _means_ something... If there's one thing an ASF member should be aware of, is its position within the foundation. I explain: Committers are code monkeys (sorry for the expression, but can't find anything better than this :) I'm the biggest code monkey of all). A committer is tied to his subproject (Tomcat in our case), his sphere of interference is the code in that particular repository. Committers report to the PMC, and its members. The PMC manages all the sub-projects for a given umbrella. Each PMC member sphere of interference, then, is the overall project code. Of course given the size of a project code (think about only ALL Jakarta code), the PMC does not deal with each individual commit, but gives guidance (for example) in case of legal complications, overall code guidelines, development methodology and such. Each PMC reports to the Board, and the board is that part of the foundation responsible for all code in all repositories, plus non-trivial matters such as money, conferences and so on... So, where do an ASF member stands? An ASF member is physically one of the owners of the code (given the (C) that we put on each file), but what's its relationship with the code? If he wants to do a commit, he needs to be a committer, if he wants to organize a project, he needs to be in the PMC, and if he wants to manage money or major legal issues he needs to be on the board... An ASF member _is_ the impersonation of the Apache spirit in itself, I might not know ANYTHING about PERL (for example), but if someone asked me to teach a PERL developer all about the Apache way of doing things, I can do that, because I've been around for long, because I've seen it happen all before, because because because, and because of all this, the other ASF members decided I was a person worthy of being a member myself. And not worthy because of what I wrote (doh, I would never be one), but because of what I think, of my opinions and ideas on how things should be done... And this has _major_ influence in how the ASF actually _WORKS_... For example look at our license: why is it drafted that way? Why it's so completely different from the GPL? Because we, members think in a particular way, have a common background of intersecting needs and ideas. Or even look at our latest interaction with your employer (Sun, for the records), about Java specification and their interaction with open-source communities: the project, the code, doesn't matter to the ASF (we're ready to put large portions of it in a trash bin for what it's worth), all that matters is that we can do things how we think they should be done... Now, WHY I got upset with Remm? Because he wrote to Chris (not a member, not a committer, not one of the Apache freaks) from his APACHE.ORG email address (and _therefore_ impersonating the whole Apache community), asking a questionable request. And Chris, since he's a smart kid and figured this all out by himself, actually wrote to the community saying hey what's up, is this guy _really_ representing you all?... I got upset (and still am) because each one of us must be really _aware_ of what he writes in private and/or public when his email address is [EMAIL PROTECTED], because he is _de_facto_ representing an entire community with that email address, and by doing this, he _must_ be so aware of the _responsibilities_ that using that address involves. It's just a matter of ethics... Pier (who rarely posts from his @apache.org address) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
GOMEZ Henri wrote: This cannot be done, as the layering structure of the ASF won't allow it. It can be hosted either in commons, either here (but then it would be swallowed by the TC project itself), or as a top level project of Jakarta (or some other project)... couldn't it be a tomcat sub project like jasper2 or jtc ? Do you remember what you say yesterday about platform problems ?) I clearly do, I replied to your post saying that I don't care about AS/400s and stated clearly what my objectives are (compilation of mod_jk under hesoteric operating systems is not a bug, not a security hole, but simply a port of a component I'm not involved with - let's make a difference here). Ok, that's why an alternative build system which may help build on hesoterico-exotico OS is still good to take. end of story ;) It's something I won't probably need in the future, and _I_BELIEVE_ doesn't affect our users community at large, as frankly AFAIK you're the only one with one of those little nifty IBM machines I know). JF/Martin from ASF have also some interesting systems ;) Sure ;-) I hope to run TC on an EBCDIC mainframe (Using Apache-1.3 and mod_jk). There is many commiters on ASF who works directly on indirectly for IBM and use/contribute ASF projects. Not speaking about AS/400 techies from IBM Rochester Labs tracking tomcat-dev in silent mode, and I'd like to heard a little more (Walt, Jim be our guests). Tomcat is a server side application and AS/400 is not so exotic on server area. That's why it's so important to get it there. IBM use on AS/400, some of the latest ASF works, Apache 2.0, Tomcat (yes still 3.2.1, they need to upgrade their own mod_jk version to be able to use tomcat 3.3.1 or 4.0.3 since updates in headers in ajp13). I'm very happy using tomcat/apache2.0/jk on AS/400 instead of being limited to IBM own websphere. Having OSS on such 'closed' systems is a great victory of ASF But at least I replied... (Ok, now don't nitpick on the fact that I'm not fixing Win32 bugs on Win32, I _don't_have_ a Win32 machine anymore, at least since I left Sun Microsystems, and my MSVC license is not available anymore since those people testing out builds at the University of Westminster don't work there anymore...) On the other hand, how many replies were there to a notification of a _bug_ (a serious security hole -IMO) I found on OS/X? Zero, not even a (as I said) since you have OS/X can you volunteer to fix it, or since I don't have OSX I don't care about it... none, nada, nihil, nothing... I didn't have OS/X, and you know how I'll be happy to have one, so couldn't do anything to fix. Now I'm wondering... What would have happened if I reported the same bug for Tomcat 3.3? :) :) :) :) Same problem that in 4.x and related question : - how many tomcat 3.3 developpers have access to OS/X ? - how many tomcat 4.x developpers have access to OS/X ? if the bug is a security problem, at least on one platform, it should be fixed and since you have access to such platform you may provide the fix. There was fix for windows platform not so long from that but it's clear that OS/X and AS/400 have a common problem today, less users/developpers than Unix or Windows -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev - I wholeheartedly agree with this. MinTC issues are not discussed around here, while I would love to follow its development (darn, not enough time?). Actually, I do care _more_ about MinTC than even Tomcat itself, as the new features of 4.0 (and 4.next) are really something I could care less. On this same thread, I don't see many issues related to Tomcat itself discussed on this list (sometimes I do post about some, but it _really_ looks like that my posts are redirected to /dev/null - for instance, see my post about extension-case matching on MacOS/X... NOONE replied, not even cared to ask Since you run OS/X everywhere, can you find a fix or some things like that. Pier, I'm a bit annoyed by your I don't care about anything attitude these days. I'm not running TC on OS X, nor is anybody else on this list. Since you're one of the happy few who are, if you have a problem, you should submit a patch (or apply it yourself, you have commit access), because the rest of us can't reproduce/test this particular issue. Now, maybe I'm alone thinking this, but I would be happy if you omitted stuff like F**K, S**T or anything related from the emails you post on this list. Of course, I'm not the police, and I am not impersonating anyone by saying this, but as I felt about the MinTC posts, I'm just stating my personal opinion. I strongly disagree with you, Remy, especially for the tone you used in your private email to Chris. I might be a f***ed up flamethrower, but I try to be politically correct. Before going out impersonating the Tomcat-DEV community, I would have preferred you asked (at least) some of your mates over there at Sun (like Craig, who's also an ASF member). Ad posting is a very well established rule in the open-source world, so I don't see anything wrong in my email (plus, no swearing or anything in it ;-)). Anyway, at least, I'm happy that this gets cleared up. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But what you are doing is a fork by all definitions that I know. It's an alternative implementation of some of the Catalina interfaces, but it's clearly not a fork. I'm using this as a working definition: A fork refers to what you do in a revision control system when you want to work independently on two versions of the same code. By extension, on Open Source projects it means taking a copy of the code base and making your own copy that isn't kept synchronized with the mainline branch. MinTC steals a little bit of code from some of the o.a.c.core classes, but it doesn't copy any of them. What it uses of the Catalina code, it uses completely intact (I'm currently tracking CVS HEAD). So it's not a fork. Forks suck. Alternative API implementations, on the other hand, are generally considered a good thing. Some spec processes even require them! It has been developed separately (by you alone), with zero input from the Tomcat community, does only share the interfaces and probably some of the modules (realms and some thing like that, I presume) with Catalina, so as far as I am concerned, any way you look at it, it is currently a fork. Of course, that's how it currently is, it may not remain that way :) Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Remy Maucherat wrote: It has been developed separately (by you alone), with zero input from the Tomcat community Good grief Remy, it _was_ discussed on tomcat-dev, as a quick search of the archives will show. You're spouting complete BS here, and I wish you wouldn't. You're also obviously confused about what MinTC is. It's all explained on the web page, and would be obvious to anybody who had tried to run the code, but I guess that's a bit much to expect. This is partially my fault for originally naming it MinimalTomcat. In retrospect, knowing more about the awful destructive politics on this list, the name choice was a terrible mistake. MinTC IS NOT a complete-but-minimal replacement for org.apache.catalina.core, ok? If you want to rant about MinTC, I'd appreciate it if your rants were correct in the details. So go read the web page, check the archives, take a look at the code, and _then_ come back and tell me I'm an anti-community idiot with stupid ideas, ok? -- Christopher St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] DistribuTopia http://www.distributopia.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Now, maybe I'm alone thinking this, but I would be happy if you omitted stuff like F**K, S**T or anything related from the emails you post on this list. You probably are. :-) As you can see below, you are also grossly mis-representing what Pier actually wrote (by implying that he violated netiquette by capitalizing). His comment was non-offensive (and accurate;-). I've certainly used f**k on the list in the past (usually followed by the word up), and have no intention of changing when that is the best description (or at least until the PMC rules otherwise:). I rarely agree with Pier, but this is the exception. If you had a problem with Chris's post, it should have gone to the list. If you'd called a vote and won, then Chris can't complain. Of course, I'm not the police, and I am not impersonating anyone by saying this, but as I felt about the MinTC posts, I'm just stating my personal opinion. I strongly disagree with you, Remy, especially for the tone you used in your private email to Chris. I might be a f***ed up flamethrower, but I try to be politically correct. Before going out impersonating the Tomcat-DEV community, I would have preferred you asked (at least) some of your mates over there at Sun (like Craig, who's also an ASF member). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bill Barker wrote: Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 22:16:40 -0700 From: Bill Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence Now, maybe I'm alone thinking this, but I would be happy if you omitted stuff like F**K, S**T or anything related from the emails you post on this list. You probably are. :-) As you can see below, you are also grossly mis-representing what Pier actually wrote (by implying that he violated netiquette by capitalizing). His comment was non-offensive (and accurate;-). I've certainly used f**k on the list in the past (usually followed by the word up), and have no intention of changing when that is the best description (or at least until the PMC rules otherwise:). personal-opinion author=craigmcc I find the use of profanity in email (or any other form of speech) to be somewhere between immature and disgusting, depending on the age of the person using it. Note that hiding behind *** doesn't make the slightest bit of difference. That doesn't stop me from having to deal with this kind of stuff all the time. But please don't ever assume that *I* will find it acceptable (even on the rare occasions when I succumb to emotion and use such words myself). Indeed, you can correctly assume that it will lower my willingness to even listen to what is being said, whether it makes sense or not. /personal-opinion I rarely agree with Pier, but this is the exception. If you had a problem with Chris's post, it should have gone to the list. If you'd called a vote and won, then Chris can't complain. Of course, I'm not the police, and I am not impersonating anyone by saying this, but as I felt about the MinTC posts, I'm just stating my personal opinion. I strongly disagree with you, Remy, especially for the tone you used in your private email to Chris. I might be a f***ed up flamethrower, but I try to be politically correct. Before going out impersonating the Tomcat-DEV community, I would have preferred you asked (at least) some of your mates over there at Sun (like Craig, who's also an ASF member). As you will note in this case, and in many others, there is no such thing as the Sun viewpoint on many TOMCAT-DEV issues. And that's appropriate -- we are individuals with our own opinions. Of course, the very same thing can be said about any mythical common ASF Member viewpoint ... :-) Craig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I've been informed by private email that I am terribly rude for making announcements of MinTC releases on the tomcat-dev list, and that I should not make any futher announcements. Sorry, but I consider it rude to post announcements about other projects on the Tomcat mailing list. I attach the email since it is not public matter. So that's it then? I've been kicked off tomcat-dev (how does that work on an open source project!?) because I've offended someone by writing code they don't like!?!? I am indeed not interested in MinTC. MinTC has all the problems Catalina had before Coyote, with the only benefit being that it is smaller and would run on a few more Java platforms. Remy ---BeginMessage--- Big news for this release: initial JSP support, a sucessful test of MinTC running a simple Apache XML-RPC demo, and confirmation that MinTC will run on a Sharp Zaurus. Watchdog results: 345 TEST(S) PASSED! 3 TEST(S) FAILED!. This should be the last alpha. Hi Christopher, While your project may be very intersting, I consider it rude when other projects advertise on the Tomcat mailing list. Of course, it is heavily Catalina related, and so you had a legitimate reason to post for a while. IMO, this is not the case anymore, and since MinTC is turning more and more into a fork, it would be nice if you didn't post your release announcements here. Thanks, Remy ---End Message--- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Personally, I've rather enjoyed following MinTC's progress (OK, not really following, since I haven't actually looked at the code :). I could see how someone might think it rude to post the announcement on tomcat-user (since many people there are easily confused :), but IMHO MinTC is something that we should see more of on tomcat-dev, not less. MinTC is certainly not a competitor with Tomcat 4.x. According to Costin, Tomcat 3.3 almost runs under J2ME (I haven't tried it), but MinTC is a different servlet spec than 3.3, so again, not a competitor. I can't see any good reason to block MinTC announcements given that they certainly aren't abusing bandwidth. Ok, fine, I'll stop complaining about them, then ;-) Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I don't known well Tomcat 4 but I search for a Servlet container which: - can be used as a component of an application but does not impose a 'web server' structure to the application - is compliant with the latest Servlet standart (~ is an implementation reference) - disallows filesystem access - still lightweight Thus, I'm interrested in MinTC. I'm a newbie but I don't understand why it could be harmful for Tomcat 4 since it seems that MinTC use a big part of Catalina and it could thus enhance Tomcat 4 by the diversified use of its libraries. Jerome -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I don't known well Tomcat 4 but I search for a Servlet container which: - can be used as a component of an application but does not impose a 'web server' structure to the application - is compliant with the latest Servlet standart (~ is an implementation reference) - disallows filesystem access - still lightweight MinTC being very similar to Catalina, it wouldn't help A much. I don't know if it can run with a security manager (point C); it adds significant complexity, so I could imagine that being left out. B is ok. I guess it is more lightweight, and hopefully it starts up faster (point D). Thus, I'm interrested in MinTC. I'm a newbie but I don't understand why it could be harmful for Tomcat 4 since it seems that MinTC use a big part of Catalina and it could thus enhance Tomcat 4 by the diversified use of its libraries. As I said, I don't see a need for it. It uses and enocourages to use some APIs I'd like to attempt to remove or modify in the future (mostly, it's the Catalina Request/Response API). Of course, it may be already way too late to be able to fix this (so in the meantime, I've been doing workarounds; that's Coyote) ;-) I also still think that Tomcat 3.3 addresses the market MinTC wants to address better (with the very artificial problem of the Servlet API version support, but this is a double edged sword, as it requires the Java2 collections). Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. :) If many people want to see MinTC here, then it will happen even if I may not like it. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Remy Maucherat wrote: If many people want to see MinTC here, then it will happen even if I may not like it. +1 to MinTC here. Lets be friendly. And open. [ +1 * notCommiter == 0, I know ] Rolf. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Another (non-committer) +1 for keeping MinTC on tomcat-dev. Having a (perhaps limited) web/servlet server in a jar is a great idea. If Catalina core, migrates to allow this without a MinTC, other than a special server.xml, then that's OK. MinTC will probably have served it's purpose, and will die having had an effect probably on the core. The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev - having two solutions for this problem is not a bad thing. -Original Message- From: Rolf Veen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 April 2002 12:01 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence Remy Maucherat wrote: If many people want to see MinTC here, then it will happen even if I may not like it. +1 to MinTC here. Lets be friendly. And open. [ +1 * notCommiter == 0, I know ] Rolf. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or related financial instruments. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
On Fri, 2002-04-19 at 13:37, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: Even if the consensus is that these things were off topic, one way to certainly make them on topic would be a discussion of whether you'd want to propose contributing MinTC to the standard distribution (so that it could be built from the same source repository, and probably packaged separately) -- either now or when you get a little further along at complete success in passing all the tests. Fully agree. Definitely the way to go. Bojan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Another (non-committer) +1 for keeping MinTC on tomcat-dev. Having a (perhaps limited) web/servlet server in a jar is a great idea. If Catalina core, migrates to allow this without a MinTC, other than a special server.xml, then that's OK. MinTC will probably have served it's purpose, and will die having had an effect probably on the core. The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev - having two solutions for this problem is not a bad thing. I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications. If the Tomcat project wants to provide MinTC, it has to be as a proposal for Tomcat 5. Note: MinTC is not the same as Catalina. It just happens to use the same interfaces. It is otherwise a completely different implementation. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev - I wholeheartedly agree with this. MinTC issues are not discussed around here, while I would love to follow its development (darn, not enough time?). Actually, I do care _more_ about MinTC than even Tomcat itself, as the new features of 4.0 (and 4.next) are really something I could care less. On this same thread, I don't see many issues related to Tomcat itself discussed on this list (sometimes I do post about some, but it _really_ looks like that my posts are redirected to /dev/null - for instance, see my post about extension-case matching on MacOS/X... NOONE replied, not even cared to ask Since you run OS/X everywhere, can you find a fix or some things like that. I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications. If the Tomcat project wants to provide MinTC, it has to be as a proposal for Tomcat 5. Note: MinTC is not the same as Catalina. It just happens to use the same interfaces. It is otherwise a completely different implementation. Correct. In fact MinTC is _not_ Tomcat, not even an ASF project, but since it's so closely tied to our baby, I appreciate the fact that Chris is keeping us informed I strongly disagree with you, Remy, especially for the tone you used in your private email to Chris. I might be a f***ed up flamethrower, but I try to be politically correct. Before going out impersonating the Tomcat-DEV community, I would have preferred you asked (at least) some of your mates over there at Sun (like Craig, who's also an ASF member). Pier -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I have to admit not having read the MinTC source, however, I thought the tomcat community uses/develops multiple implementations of many interfaces. Most of the http/socket/auth?/config (xml file/ajp-webapp/admin) code is effectively multiple implementations of the same interfaces. Isn't the whole design of catalina intended to allow different implementations of practically every concrete class? I get the impresssion MinTC is developing different config/bootstrap/resource-location implementations, but that much of the code is shared as is? If MinTC was replacing the core processing of Tomcat 3.3 i'd be more inclined to take your point, as the request chain is much more dedicated and part of the whole, whereas catalina is just a bunch of nested containers isn't it? -Original Message- From: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 April 2002 13:24 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence Another (non-committer) +1 for keeping MinTC on tomcat-dev. Having a (perhaps limited) web/servlet server in a jar is a great idea. If Catalina core, migrates to allow this without a MinTC, other than a special server.xml, then that's OK. MinTC will probably have served it's purpose, and will die having had an effect probably on the core. The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev - having two solutions for this problem is not a bad thing. I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications. If the Tomcat project wants to provide MinTC, it has to be as a proposal for Tomcat 5. Note: MinTC is not the same as Catalina. It just happens to use the same interfaces. It is otherwise a completely different implementation. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or related financial instruments. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
The only problem I see, is NOT discussing MinTC issues on tomcat-dev - I wholeheartedly agree with this. MinTC issues are not discussed around here, while I would love to follow its development (darn, not enough time?). MinTC is an excellent idea but since it's not an Apache project, should it be discussed (more) here ? Solution could be : - host MinTC in SF. - add MinTC as a tomcat 4 subproject and host here in Apache Actually, I do care _more_ about MinTC than even Tomcat itself, as the new features of 4.0 (and 4.next) are really something I could care less. Having MinTC included in TC 4.x could help add a new target to TC 4, the embedded market. Did there is a reason against adding it to CVS if Christopher agree. It will be in sync with HEAD, use gump, give ideas which could make a better TC 4.1 or 5.0 On this same thread, I don't see many issues related to Tomcat itself discussed on this list (sometimes I do post about some, but it _really_ looks like that my posts are redirected to /dev/null - for instance, see my post about extension-case matching on MacOS/X... NOONE replied, not even cared to ask Since you run OS/X everywhere, can you find a fix or some things like that. Do you remember what you say yesterday about platform problems ?) I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications. Yes, and now that TC 3.3 and 4.0 people share effort, jasper/connector, it will be better to see something like MinTC included in maybe it's own tomcat subproject, the goal a minimalistic 2.3/1.2 servlet implementation using TC 4.x -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Remy Maucherat wrote: I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications. That would have been the best. But right now there are two different implementations of the 2.2 spec, without any clear winner from the user's and also the integrator's point of view. If Tomcat 5 builds on Tomcat 4.x, should 3.x die then ? I don't think so. The two approaches are so different that, in case (and only in case) the performance of both remains similar, I would prefer to have the choice. Within the Apache umbrella, if possible. So, I'm clearly +1 for more that one container implementation on Apache, each one with its own goals (complex/simple, big/small, Interceptor/Valve, etc). And all (except one) free to implement (or not) the sunny specs. [Again, +1 == 0, in this case] Kind regards. Rolf. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I am also interested in MinTC. But I must say I understand Remy's point about 'rudeness'. I don't like bloat and I would love to see more modularization ( in 4.x and 3.x and most of the programs I know ). But this should be done by contributing to the project, not by creating a fork. And if MinTC is sucessfull ( and I hope it will ), we'll have all the problems in trying to merge or switch or fight. So even if I don't like Valves and a lot of the 4.x API, I would preffer to have any API changes/modularization/simplifications in the main branch, with pre-agreement from all parties - not in a form of announcements of what has changed. Even if MinTC is a step forward, by adding more modularization and cleaning things - it is certainly not something we participate in at this moment. And I personally believe what is private must remain private - I would be very upset if an sensitive email I send in private to someone is made public ( even with the sender name removed - it was no doubt about who sent the mail, at least from the 'rudeness' clue :-). However, after things settle a bit I would be happy to propose Cristopher as a commiter, and hope the changes and ideas will be discussed here and result in code changes in the main branch. Costin On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: I've been informed by private email that I am terribly rude for making announcements of MinTC releases on the tomcat-dev list, and that I should not make any futher announcements. Sorry, but I consider it rude to post announcements about other projects on the Tomcat mailing list. I attach the email since it is not public matter. So that's it then? I've been kicked off tomcat-dev (how does that work on an open source project!?) because I've offended someone by writing code they don't like!?!? I am indeed not interested in MinTC. MinTC has all the problems Catalina had before Coyote, with the only benefit being that it is smaller and would run on a few more Java platforms. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I have to admit not having read the MinTC source, however, I thought the tomcat community uses/develops multiple implementations of many interfaces. Most of the http/socket/auth?/config (xml file/ajp-webapp/admin) code is effectively multiple implementations of the same interfaces. Isn't the whole design of catalina intended to allow different implementations of practically every concrete class? The point is not about developing multiple implementations - but about beeing a part of the community and proposing/discussing changes instead of posting announcements of a fork's releases. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
GOMEZ Henri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - add MinTC as a tomcat 4 subproject and host here in Apache This cannot be done, as the layering structure of the ASF won't allow it. It can be hosted either in commons, either here (but then it would be swallowed by the TC project itself), or as a top level project of Jakarta (or some other project)... On this same thread, I don't see many issues related to Tomcat itself discussed on this list (sometimes I do post about some, but it _really_ looks like that my posts are redirected to /dev/null - for instance, see my post about extension-case matching on MacOS/X... NOONE replied, not even cared to ask Since you run OS/X everywhere, can you find a fix or some things like that. Do you remember what you say yesterday about platform problems ?) I clearly do, I replied to your post saying that I don't care about AS/400s and stated clearly what my objectives are (compilation of mod_jk under hesoteric operating systems is not a bug, not a security hole, but simply a port of a component I'm not involved with - let's make a difference here). It's something I won't probably need in the future, and _I_BELIEVE_ doesn't affect our users community at large, as frankly AFAIK you're the only one with one of those little nifty IBM machines I know). But at least I replied... (Ok, now don't nitpick on the fact that I'm not fixing Win32 bugs on Win32, I _don't_have_ a Win32 machine anymore, at least since I left Sun Microsystems, and my MSVC license is not available anymore since those people testing out builds at the University of Westminster don't work there anymore...) On the other hand, how many replies were there to a notification of a _bug_ (a serious security hole -IMO) I found on OS/X? Zero, not even a (as I said) since you have OS/X can you volunteer to fix it, or since I don't have OSX I don't care about it... none, nada, nihil, nothing... Now I'm wondering... What would have happened if I reported the same bug for Tomcat 3.3? :) :) :) :) Pier -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have to admit not having read the MinTC source, however, I thought the tomcat community uses/develops multiple implementations of many interfaces. Most of the http/socket/auth?/config (xml file/ajp-webapp/admin) code is effectively multiple implementations of the same interfaces. Isn't the whole design of catalina intended to allow different implementations of practically every concrete class? The point is not about developing multiple implementations - but about beeing a part of the community and proposing/discussing changes instead of posting announcements of a fork's releases. Someone might feel that as a fork, someone might feel that as an interesting development thread and evolution so closely related to the current codebase not even to look at _who_ is developing it and _where_... Someone might perceive Tomcat 3.3 as a fork as well, or the whole Tomcat stuff as a fork from HTTPD since someone invented the HTTP connector, but do we want to go over the same stuff over-and-over-and-over again? Pier -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Rolf Veen wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: I will veto this (or vote against, if it's a majority vote). It has been very clear for a while that the Tomcat project has to provide one and only one servlet container for a particular version of the specifications. That would have been the best. But right now there are two different implementations of the 2.2 spec, without any clear winner from the user's and also the integrator's point of view. If Tomcat 5 builds on Tomcat 4.x, should 3.x die then ? I don't think so. The 'product' of tomcat-dev is a _community_, not a servlet container. And I will -1 any Tomcat 5 proposal that doesn't address this problem and is acceptable to both 3.x and 4.x people. It can be either a merge of 3.x with 4.x, or it can start from scratch with a list of requirements and proposals ( like Xerces 2 or Axis ), discussed one by one and then implemented by everyone. I hope we'll not end with an ant2 model, with 2-3 different competing 'proposals' ( all with cat-derived names, but little else in common ). The work in j-t-c and jasper is a good start. And if Tomcat 5 will have both valves and interceptors - but a single community behind it - then it'll be a success. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
This cannot be done, as the layering structure of the ASF won't allow it. It can be hosted either in commons, either here (but then it would be swallowed by the TC project itself), or as a top level project of Jakarta (or some other project)... couldn't it be a tomcat sub project like jasper2 or jtc ? Do you remember what you say yesterday about platform problems ?) I clearly do, I replied to your post saying that I don't care about AS/400s and stated clearly what my objectives are (compilation of mod_jk under hesoteric operating systems is not a bug, not a security hole, but simply a port of a component I'm not involved with - let's make a difference here). Ok, that's why an alternative build system which may help build on hesoterico-exotico OS is still good to take. end of story ;) It's something I won't probably need in the future, and _I_BELIEVE_ doesn't affect our users community at large, as frankly AFAIK you're the only one with one of those little nifty IBM machines I know). JF/Martin from ASF have also some interesting systems ;) There is many commiters on ASF who works directly on indirectly for IBM and use/contribute ASF projects. Not speaking about AS/400 techies from IBM Rochester Labs tracking tomcat-dev in silent mode, and I'd like to heard a little more (Walt, Jim be our guests). Tomcat is a server side application and AS/400 is not so exotic on server area. That's why it's so important to get it there. IBM use on AS/400, some of the latest ASF works, Apache 2.0, Tomcat (yes still 3.2.1, they need to upgrade their own mod_jk version to be able to use tomcat 3.3.1 or 4.0.3 since updates in headers in ajp13). I'm very happy using tomcat/apache2.0/jk on AS/400 instead of being limited to IBM own websphere. Having OSS on such 'closed' systems is a great victory of ASF But at least I replied... (Ok, now don't nitpick on the fact that I'm not fixing Win32 bugs on Win32, I _don't_have_ a Win32 machine anymore, at least since I left Sun Microsystems, and my MSVC license is not available anymore since those people testing out builds at the University of Westminster don't work there anymore...) On the other hand, how many replies were there to a notification of a _bug_ (a serious security hole -IMO) I found on OS/X? Zero, not even a (as I said) since you have OS/X can you volunteer to fix it, or since I don't have OSX I don't care about it... none, nada, nihil, nothing... I didn't have OS/X, and you know how I'll be happy to have one, so couldn't do anything to fix. Now I'm wondering... What would have happened if I reported the same bug for Tomcat 3.3? :) :) :) :) Same problem that in 4.x and related question : - how many tomcat 3.3 developpers have access to OS/X ? - how many tomcat 4.x developpers have access to OS/X ? if the bug is a security problem, at least on one platform, it should be fixed and since you have access to such platform you may provide the fix. There was fix for windows platform not so long from that but it's clear that OS/X and AS/400 have a common problem today, less users/developpers than Unix or Windows -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The point is not about developing multiple implementations - but about beeing a part of the community and proposing/discussing changes instead of posting announcements of a fork's releases. Costin, My response got to be way too long, so here's just a summary. It comes off as a bit clipped, but that's because it's short, not because the questions were unreasonable :-) - I did discuss MinTC/MinimalTomcat on the dev list, check the archives. The topic didn't seem very popular, but I took that to mean I had weird requirements that few others shared. Later on, I started making announcements as a way to generate discussion and keep the core developers up-to-date. - It's not a fork. If it were a fork, I wouldn't care about the core code. But it's not, so I do. It's not Tomcat 4, but it is, by any reasonable definition, a version of Catalina. - It was always my intention to propose donating the code back to Apache, I should have been more clear about this. But I wanted to wait for the 1.0 release, for obvious reasons. - MinTC is not competition for Tomcat. You would have to be frigging insane to use MinTC if you could possibly use Tomcat 4 instead. But sometimes Tomcat 4 is difficult or impossible to use. That's not because Tomcat 4 is bad, it's just that it's full featured. I didn't think a patch to remove MBeans, JNDI and auto-deployment from the core would be well received :-) If you're interested, there's more detail on the MinTC page. Thanks for your feedback, -- Christopher St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] DistribuTopia http://www.distributopia.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Christopher K. St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - MinTC is not competition for Tomcat. You would have to be frigging insane to use MinTC if you could possibly use Tomcat 4 instead. But sometimes Tomcat 4 is difficult or impossible to use. That's not because Tomcat 4 is bad, it's just that it's full featured. I didn't think a patch to remove MBeans, JNDI and auto-deployment from the core would be well received :-) I don't consider me a Tomcat 4.0 core committer, but that patch would have my biggest +1 on Earth! :) Pier (who has a script to remove stuff from TC4's binary distro!) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
I don't consider me a Tomcat 4.0 core committer, but that patch would have my biggest +1 on Earth! :) Pier (who has a script to remove stuff from TC4's binary distro!) I'm also not a core (not even satelitar) commiter in TC 4 yet, but a lighter TC 4.x will have my +1 and the current TC 4.0.x 'LE' mode is allready a good step in that direction. The use of mx4j and PureTLS is also a big plus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Christopher, I think a more modular 4.0 would be a step forward - and it seems many others agree. But what you are doing is a fork by all definitions that I know. As I said, I do agree with Remy - if you care about tomcat you should 'persist' in pushing for your ideas and find ways to work with the rest of us ( instead of forking and 'keeping us updated of the evolution of the fork' ). As this thread shows, there is a lot of support for a minimalistic version of tomcat. Tomcat3.3 already has a target that builds the 600k-single-jar-no-extra-files version, and nobody complained. So I see no reason for a fork ( at least not before you finished all the options in getting your modules accepted ). You must at least try first. JNDI, JMX, autodeplyment and a lot of other things are usefull and interesting - but as long as you don't brake them I see no valid reason for not accepting alternative implementations. ( the same as I wouldn't see any reason for not accepting an JNDI or JMX module for 3.3 - as long as we can still build a minimal container and the current set of modules remain the default ). Maybe not in the main branch, but in a contrib/. But discussed and accepted on tomcat-dev. Costin On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Christopher K. St. John wrote: - I did discuss MinTC/MinimalTomcat on the dev list, check the archives. The topic didn't seem very popular, but I took that to mean I had weird requirements that few others shared. Later on, I started making announcements as a way to generate discussion and keep the core developers up-to-date. - It's not a fork. If it were a fork, I wouldn't care about the core code. But it's not, so I do. It's not Tomcat 4, but it is, by any reasonable definition, a version of Catalina. - It was always my intention to propose donating the code back to Apache, I should have been more clear about this. But I wanted to wait for the 1.0 release, for obvious reasons. - MinTC is not competition for Tomcat. You would have to be frigging insane to use MinTC if you could possibly use Tomcat 4 instead. But sometimes Tomcat 4 is difficult or impossible to use. That's not because Tomcat 4 is bad, it's just that it's full featured. I didn't think a patch to remove MBeans, JNDI and auto-deployment from the core would be well received :-) If you're interested, there's more detail on the MinTC page. Thanks for your feedback, -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Skip ahead to the substantive-discussion section if you're bored with the other topics in this thread. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But what you are doing is a fork by all definitions that I know. It's an alternative implementation of some of the Catalina interfaces, but it's clearly not a fork. I'm using this as a working definition: A fork refers to what you do in a revision control system when you want to work independently on two versions of the same code. By extension, on Open Source projects it means taking a copy of the code base and making your own copy that isn't kept synchronized with the mainline branch. MinTC steals a little bit of code from some of the o.a.c.core classes, but it doesn't copy any of them. What it uses of the Catalina code, it uses completely intact (I'm currently tracking CVS HEAD). So it's not a fork. Forks suck. Alternative API implementations, on the other hand, are generally considered a good thing. Some spec processes even require them! You must at least try first. I did. Don't take my word for it, it's in the archives. substantive-discussion I rejected the idea not because it was met with hostility (I got good feedback), but because the discussion (on tomcat-dev) convinced me that it was not the right technical solution. It comes down to the fact that totally generic code has some rather extreme practical drawbacks. The classes within o.a.c.core,for example, need to be able to depend to some degree on each other's innards. As Craig said: Within a particular package (org.apache.catalina.core), I don't see a problem with the classes depending on each other's insides -- the package as a whole is designed, as a unit, to provide the required functionality for that package. o.a.c.core's required functionality is simply very different than that of MinTC. MinTC has such a different audience that it didn't seem reasonable to saddle Tomcat 4 with MinTC's requirements. Integrating the two would require that every last bit of functionality was somehow modularized out of Tomcat 4 core, and that's undesirable. It's like making a combination jackhammer and framing hammer just because they both have the word hammer in their name. Sure, you could do it, but it would be silly. Right tool for the right job, and all that. The whole write very specific tools but make them interoperate thing (The Unix Philosophy) isn't for everyone. Some people prefer other approaches, like extreme factoring and adding loads of hooks. It's all good. Knowing MinTC is a Unix-philosophy sort of project might make it easier to understand where I'm going with it. /substantive-discussion Again, the feedback is good. It all helps, especially the architecture discussion, even if it's negative. (Although I can't help but wish some of the people commenting now would have piped up earlier :-) -- Christopher St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] DistribuTopia http://www.distributopia.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Personally, I don't have any problem with occasional announcements of interesting things related to Tomcat on this list, and MinTC certainly qualifies as interesting in my book! As for the community as a whole, consensus usually forms rapidly when the issue is aired publicly on the mailing list (instead of directly to the poster). That way, we'd quickly find out whether the person complaining was really voicing a common sentiment, or out smoking something. Does whoever was concerned about this want to fess up and start that discussion? Even if the consensus is that these things were off topic, one way to certainly make them on topic would be a discussion of whether you'd want to propose contributing MinTC to the standard distribution (so that it could be built from the same source repository, and probably packaged separately) -- either now or when you get a little further along at complete success in passing all the tests. I'd also like to take the opportunity to thank you publicly for your many contributions and suggestions -- one of the best things about my experience with Tomcat has always been seeing the people who care deeply enough about it to help improve its quality, instead of just whining and complaining. Craig On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Christopher K. St. John wrote: Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 19:58:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher K. St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence I've been informed by private email that I am terribly rude for making announcements of MinTC releases on the tomcat-dev list, and that I should not make any futher announcements. So that's it then? I've been kicked off tomcat-dev (how does that work on an open source project!?) because I've offended someone by writing code they don't like!?!? This is a bit of a problem for me, as MinTC is, technically, a version of Catalina, and should be a perfectly appropriate topic for tomcat-dev. Especially when it's one message every few weeks. MinTC is certainly not a mainline version of Tomcat 4, but it shares a significant amount of (unforked) code, and that makes it important to seek a close relationship with the people maintaining the codebase. It's a bit like sharing a telephone booth with an 800 lb gorilla: it's a bit much to hope to have any influence over what phone calls are made, but at least you can hope to make your presence know so that you don't get sat on. It's a dilemma: there's no point in having an antagonistic relationship with the core Tomcat developers, that's worse than nothing. But good grief! This is an opensource project! MinTC is a version of Catalina, where the heck else am I going to discuss it? I'm contributing bug fixes and code back to the core implementation, I'm helping to clean up the core interfaces, I'm using the Catalina code, I'm doing documentation work, but I'm not welcome? That seems so strange, and so sad. I'd like to get some feedback from someone other than the person who wrote me privately. Craig? Could you give me an opinion please? You seem to have the moral leadership role here. Anybody else, please chime in. I'm horrified that I might have been being unknowingly rude, but I'm at a loss to explain how exactly I've caused such awful offense. I honestly don't get it. Thanks, and please, as you think about your response, keep in mind that the Catalina proposal docs specifically talk about people doing exactly what MinTC does under the Catalina umbrella. Thanks, and sorry for any inadvertant rudeness, -cks -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Personally, I've rather enjoyed following MinTC's progress (OK, not really following, since I haven't actually looked at the code :). I could see how someone might think it rude to post the announcement on tomcat-user (since many people there are easily confused :), but IMHO MinTC is something that we should see more of on tomcat-dev, not less. MinTC is certainly not a competitor with Tomcat 4.x. According to Costin, Tomcat 3.3 almost runs under J2ME (I haven't tried it), but MinTC is a different servlet spec than 3.3, so again, not a competitor. I can't see any good reason to block MinTC announcements given that they certainly aren't abusing bandwidth. - Original Message - From: Christopher K. St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 7:58 PM Subject: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence I've been informed by private email that I am terribly rude for making announcements of MinTC releases on the tomcat-dev list, and that I should not make any futher announcements. So that's it then? I've been kicked off tomcat-dev (how does that work on an open source project!?) because I've offended someone by writing code they don't like!?!? This is a bit of a problem for me, as MinTC is, technically, a version of Catalina, and should be a perfectly appropriate topic for tomcat-dev. Especially when it's one message every few weeks. MinTC is certainly not a mainline version of Tomcat 4, but it shares a significant amount of (unforked) code, and that makes it important to seek a close relationship with the people maintaining the codebase. It's a bit like sharing a telephone booth with an 800 lb gorilla: it's a bit much to hope to have any influence over what phone calls are made, but at least you can hope to make your presence know so that you don't get sat on. It's a dilemma: there's no point in having an antagonistic relationship with the core Tomcat developers, that's worse than nothing. But good grief! This is an opensource project! MinTC is a version of Catalina, where the heck else am I going to discuss it? I'm contributing bug fixes and code back to the core implementation, I'm helping to clean up the core interfaces, I'm using the Catalina code, I'm doing documentation work, but I'm not welcome? That seems so strange, and so sad. I'd like to get some feedback from someone other than the person who wrote me privately. Craig? Could you give me an opinion please? You seem to have the moral leadership role here. Anybody else, please chime in. I'm horrified that I might have been being unknowingly rude, but I'm at a loss to explain how exactly I've caused such awful offense. I honestly don't get it. Thanks, and please, as you think about your response, keep in mind that the Catalina proposal docs specifically talk about people doing exactly what MinTC does under the Catalina umbrella. Thanks, and sorry for any inadvertant rudeness, -cks -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MinTC, terrible rudeness, persistence
Craig R. McClanahan wrote: a discussion of whether you'd want to propose contributing MinTC to the standard distribution (so that it could be built from the same source repository, and probably packaged separately) -- either now or when you get a little further along at complete success in passing all the tests. I was planning to bring it up after version 1.0 was out. That makes it easier to judge the code. And, to be honest, until a couple days ago I wasn't really sure MinTC could be made fully spec compliant. Multiple classloaders hitting the same jar is kind of funky around the edges (especially on bleeping PJAE, which has the crazy 1.1 classloaders will not expose .class files through getResource() restriction. They'll give you .clazz files, though evil cackle) I was thinking something like a contrib directory might be neat, but that's getting a little ahead of things. -- Christopher St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] DistribuTopia http://www.distributopia.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
