On 26/6/03 3:50, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
note that for apache 1.3.x, JNI would have been hard because of the
multi-process environment, but for apache 2.0, a JNI-based mod_java is
perfectly valid architecturarely, but nobody works on it because of this
sin syndrome.
I'm
On 27/6/03 0:43, Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:32:08AM +0100, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
...
Best way of doing things? Writing a connector for the servlet container
using JNI that uses unix sockets, named pipes, or something which is
actually faster than the usual
Ask Bjoern Hansen escribió:
Dan Sugalski wrote an article about why we can't just run Perl,
Python or Ruby on the JVM or CLI:
http://www.sidhe.org/~dan/blog/archives/000151.html
This was the paper I couldn't find before. It made me think it was
interesting, if it was able to do continuations,
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:32:08AM +0100, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
...
Best way of doing things? Writing a connector for the servlet container
using JNI that uses unix sockets, named pipes, or something which is
actually faster than the usual TCP socket
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Greg Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 07:42:12PM -0700, Costin Manolache wrote:
...
Dot net is actually doing almost the same mistake as java (AFAIK)- they
support other languages, but only syntactically ( like java does with the
languages that generate java
Costin Manolache [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
Now, if we put a JVM inside the Apache process scope, we end up with the
same problem we had with Apache 1.3, how in the world am I going to be able
to share a session between a JVM inside a multithreaded
copying the cocoon folks since we are getting pretty serious with
continuations overthere (we implement them using a modified version of
Mozilla Rhino, a javascript engine written in java)
on 6/26/03 3:15 PM Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Santiago Gala wrote:
[...]
I still
Stefano Mazzocchi escribió:
(...)
Wow, a VM with native continuations, very interesting.
Question: do you think it would be possible to compile java source code
into parrot bytecode? how would the limited Perl typing capabilities
would impact that?
The key piece is the validator. The Java VM uses
robert burrell donkin wrote:
one interesting consequence of a general move within jakarta towards
extensive unit testing is that the time required to commit patches has
significantly increased. my experience now is that creating good unit
tests takes more than the time it takes to write the
on 6/26/03 6:46 AM Santiago Gala wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi escribió:
on 6/24/03 6:59 AM Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
I think that we have multiple subcultures under the ASF umbrella, due to
the way that the umbrella projects were formed. Whether you like that
or not, I think that is the
Ben Laurie wrote, On 26/06/2003 18.54:
...
Presumably the idea behind unit testing is that it reduces the time
spent chasing bugs.
Mostly in OS it reduces time spent *re*chasing bugs ;-)
If the overall effect is not less developer time
used per unit of functionality, then I have to wonder what
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, robert burrell donkin wrote:
one interesting consequence of a general move within jakarta towards
extensive unit testing is that the time required to commit patches has
significantly increased. my experience now is that creating good unit
tests takes more than the time
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
on 6/23/03 8:42 AM Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
..cut..
- In the java, and to some extend the xml world, we have much, much
much more code which was only touched 1-4 times by = 2 people
over time.
this is another problem and, IMO,
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Ted Leung wrote:
..cut..
- Organisationally xml and java are still lagging behind;
but have been catching up (though the catch up has slowed down
somewhat due to a much larger influx from the old school
side; and that influx is by average younger than
on 6/24/03 6:59 AM Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
I think that we have multiple subcultures under the ASF umbrella, due to
the way that the umbrella projects were formed. Whether you like that
or not, I think that is the reality. I know that I personally would
And I think that is a healty
On 22/06/2003 3:43 Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
I personally believe in keeping the bar low for committership and
keeping the bar high for membership.
I believe that this helps us getting more people inside the foundation
(potential members) but keeps the real powers of the foundation heavily
filtered
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Steven Noels wrote:
Stefano's insightful post got me carried away to run some stats on
members projects: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/archives/001008.html
I've always stopped short of doing just this; and more kept things limited
to a pie diagram and postings/#of
On 23/06/2003 15:42 Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
This as it mostly shows 'today' rather than the members body which grew
over time and is effectively lagging. I.e. you are looking at data which
tells you more about history than about the future. And that todays future
is tomorrows history.
My
on 6/21/03 11:01 PM Thom May wrote:
* Stefano Mazzocchi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
NOTE: copying members@ and community@ since this might be helpful to
many people.
Stefano,
this was a really well written piece that, for me anyway, explained
perfectly the difference between committers
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Steven Noels wrote:
Stefano's insightful post got me carried away to run some stats on
members projects: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/archives/001008.html
I've always stopped short of doing just this; and more kept things limited
to
on 6/23/03 8:42 AM Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Steven Noels wrote:
Stefano's insightful post got me carried away to run some stats on
members projects: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/archives/001008.html
I've always stopped short of doing just this; and more
On Monday, June 23, 2003, at 06:59 PM, Ted Leung wrote:
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
snip
- the java world seems to need amazing number of indians (or
committers) relative to lines of codes or bugs fixed. And seems
to see more isolated pockets of people than the xml and other
On 23/06/2003 21:30 Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Dirk is right pointing out how a specific frame in time tells you the
'position' but not the 'speed'. Luckily, social dynamics don't exhibit
the Heinsenberg principle.
To amuse the easily bored, here's 2002, 2001 and 2000:
NOTE: copying members@ and community@ since this might be helpful to
many people.
As many of you know, three cocoon committers were nominated then elected
members of the Apache Software Foundation yesterday. Since I've been
inquired by a few on how the system works, I'll spend some words on the
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
NOTE: copying members@ and community@ since this might be helpful to
many people.
WoW! - Excelent summary. Can we put this up somewhere on one of the
foundation pages please, if need be as 'Stefano's excelent and balanced
view' :-)
Dw.
As many of you know, three cocoon committers were nominated then elected
members of the Apache Software Foundation yesterday. Since I've been
inquired by a few on how the system works, I'll spend some words on the
process and what it means for me.
Thank you very much for these words, Stefano.
26 matches
Mail list logo
