Hi guys,
I really appreciate those mails below. I takes my mind off all my
(technical) worries and the pressure I've meanwhile the day :-))
We still shouldn't forget that all the guys are doing that for nothing and
are helping us earning our money !
AND we shouldn't forget to laugh...at least once a day !?
Oliver
AXA eSolutions GmbH
AXA Konzern AG Germany
Oliver Lauer
Web Architect
Wörthstraße 34
D-50668 Köln
Germany
Tel.: +49 221 148 31277
Fax: +49 221 148 43963
Mobil: +49 179 59 064 59
e-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Vladimir Grishchenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 10:45
An: Tomcat Users List
Betreff: Re: Tomcat 3.3, server.xml and a lot of fun
A collection of java designer's newsgroup posts can be found here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]hl=enlr=safe=off;
btnG=Google+Searchsite=groups
Looks like s/he can be nice to people when in good mood. Surprisingly, none
of his posts is Java related.
--V.
- Original Message -
From: java programmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jan Labanowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: Tomcat 3.3, server.xml and a lot of fun
--- Jan Labanowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You must be working for Microsoft, I assume...
BTW... servlet.xml cannot have DTD, since people can
add their own stuff
(classes), instantiate it in server.xml, and name it
the way they want,
and DTD would not allow it...
Jan
Please don't top post. Replies go under the
original post. Only MS weenies with MS outlook
top post.
Ok. I am going to rant here.
rant
Tomcat 3.3.x's internals really suck. I have looked
at probably all of the JDK source over the past
5 years and tomcat is at the very bottom in terms
of quality, readability, even trivialities like
source code formatting/comments.
JSP/Servlets are *important*. They are probably the
most important java api, now that java has proven
to be a total failure on the client side. (java, in
general, is *great* though).
Now, it wouldn't be so bad that tomcat is a internal
mess, if the exposed API/interface was pleasant.
By this I mean, installing, configuring, extending,
and documentation. Tomcat falls down in all areas.
I mean, I really am very frustrated. There should be
no reason to be.
Let's take a simple, yet real world example of 2
virtual hosts, each served by Tomcat.
Well, do I use:
a) 1 tomcat instance with 1 server.xml file with
different AutoWebApps ? (have you seen how
terse the autowebapp doc is ? They don't even
say if the host name param should be a FQDN) ?
b) 2 separate instances of tomcat with 2 separate
server.xml files ?
c) Some other random, trial by fire combo ?
I mean, in places, the docs say that version 3.3
and earler require separate instances of Tomcat.
Other places, they say things like: You can add
apps to multiple virtual hosts. (implying 1
tomcat server ?).
I don't know. The JSPException that I described in
the original post, is not really documented
anywhere. Tomcat should have printed a meaningful
message when that happened. Just barfing up the
Exception itself, doesn't help me, i.e., the end
user at all.
There isn't any real documentation, and whatever
there is, is mutually incompatible in many places.
Is this the best Sun/Apache can do ?
And on a personal note: I think the whole webapp
idea is silly. It sounds promising of course, but
it complicates things for most people. If I am
running a web site, run with jsp's, then I want:
apache (httpd)
|
|_some doc root
|
|__ all .html, .jsp files, images here.
And only one context (/).
In addition, path or extension based mappings
_are_ useful but should be the _sole_ domain of
the web server. That would be Apache in my case.
That's how ASP works, that's how LiveWire used
to work. I don't want my images, files etc., all
over the place. I want them all under the htdocs
directory. (yeah, I know I can do it, but I want
that to be the default out of box tomcat behavior).
webapps should never have made it
into the spec. Name three well known
web sites running in a mass virtual hosted
environment and deployed as webapps with
a web.xml file to boot ! Hell, name *any*.
And the kicker is the gratuitous, idiotic
use of XML for _configuration_. For you to say:
servlet.xml cannot have DTD, since people can
add their own stuff
(classes), instantiate it in server.xml, and name it
the way they want,
shows that you have no conceptual idea what xml is
intended for.
Java:
class foo {
//variables (structure)
}
C:
struct {
//variables (structure)
}
Database:
create table [ .. columns/structure ..]
BNF:
syntax ::= { rule }
rule ::= identifier ::= expression
expression ::= term { | term }
term ::= factor { factor }
[..]
