Same here. I don't quite get why the old style files can't be parsed to
whatever newfangled data structure is used by the new version, with whatever
defaults best approximate the old behaviour.
Jean-François Lamy
Teximus
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Rob Lockstone
Envoyé : 29 octobre 2008 19:43
À : General Discussion for the Resin application server
Objet : Re: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
I'm with you, Leonid! The config file changes from one major release
to the next has always been a big pain. I know that some are needed
from time to time, but this has often been the biggest hurdle in
upgrading for us. We're still on 3.0.x because I haven't yet had the
time to vet and apply the significant config file changes between 3.0
and 3.1. 3.2? Forget about it! (Not stable enough for us yet anyway.)
Rob
On Oct 29, 2008, at 10:44, Leonid Geller wrote:
In general I like how 3.2 has fewer jars to go around. Hessian is
the exception. It would be nice if all of Hessian code was factored
out into a separate library in 3.2.x, so we can drop it into other
containers, whether they are applications running 3.1.x or perhaps
third party apps like tomcat.
Also it appears 3.2 is not backward compatible from config stand-
point. It is not enough to simply rename .conf to .xml, some
configuration elements that used to be optional are required now.
This raises the barrier to upgrade from 3.1.x to 3.2.x
-Leonid
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
] On Behalf Of Emil Ong
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:36 PM
To: General Discussion for the Resin application server
Subject: [Resin-interest] 3.2 experience?
Resin 3.2.1 is our latest release in the 3.2 branch, which is our
development branch. This branch still undergoes our extensive release
testing, but has many changes which have not been quite as vetted
Resin
3.1 in production use.
If you are using 3.2.0 or 3.2.1, what have your experiences been?
Are you using it in production? After testing, did you decide to
use Resin 3.2. or to stick with Resin 3.1? Why? What did your
testing
include? What features do you like and what would you like to see?
I appreciate any feedback you have to offer as we've gotten a few
questions from people interested in using Resin 3.2, but want to hear
from other folks who've kicked the tires a bit.
Thanks,
Emil
___
resin-interest mailing list
resin-interest@caucho.com
http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
___
resin-interest mailing list
resin-interest@caucho.com
http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
