> > Servlet2.0 -> Tocmat3.3
> > Servlet2.1 -> Tomcat3.3
> > Servlet2.2 -> Tomcat3.3
> > Servlet2.3 -> Tomcat3.3
> > Servlet.next -> Tomcat3.3
>
> I don't agree.
> Having :
> Servlet2.0 -> TocmatNext
> Servlet2.1 -> TomcatNext
> Servlet2.2 -> TomcatNext
> Servlet2.3 -> TomcatNext
> Servlet.next -> TomcatNext
> is very fine.
>
> I don't think people want anything but bug fixes (and perhaps a few more
> features) for Tomcat 3.2 and eventually 3.3.
I wish to be able to know what people want, but I agree with you on this
one - I'll do whatever I can to make sure 3.3 is the last major
( ok, dot.dot ) revision based on tomcat3.
I think tomcat3.3's core is reasonably clean and reflects all the original
design patterns, and it is flexible enough that it'll need only minor
fixes in the core.
All future versions of the spec can be implemented as modules by whoever
is interested - and people can decide what they want and will use that.
> I think that would be the best. Now, a few points :
> - The main branch in the jakarta-tomcat tree is broken, and is also a bug
> mess right now. I think it needs to be fixed so that it complies more with
> the objectives set for TC3.3.
Yes, there is one big fix that got in recently, needed to support "delayed
byte to char conversion", needed to fix the charset encoding problem ( one
of the biggest problems of tomcat 3.2 and before AFAIK, and I personally
don't know a better solution )
The fix is also very important for performance.
There are a number of bugs introduced in JSP by moving to JspInterceptor -
this can be reverted, but I think it's very important to do it right this
time, as the speed difference is very significant.
There are probably other bugs introduced between 3.2 and 3.3 - most of the
old deprecated methods ( deprecated since 3.1 !) were finally removed, and
also some changes to improve the modularity of 3.3 ( needed if we want 3.3
to be the last one - since almost everything can be done now in modules,
and almost nothing is in the 3.3 core )
I think it's important to finish with the big changes ( since those add
the most of the refactoring bugs), and after that start fixing.
I'll start doing that ASAP.
> - If it was possible to avoid code duplication for as many components as
> possible it would be great ;) Fixes / improvements are really hard to merge
> otherwise. Since I think the main point of disagreement is the servlet
> engine core, that should be doable.
That's what I think too - if you are referring to webdav, all I did was
make it work with tomcat3. I don't think that's wrong - it is great code
and it should be portable.
You are the main author and you can of course decide if you want it to be
used only with catalina or if other servlet containers are allowed to use
it.
( of course, I'll have to track whatever happens in the main repositroy
and keep the ported webdav up to date, or you may want to take some of the
changes and make it an independent module, as it should be IMHO. )
I don't know if "people don't want this kind of features in 3.x " - so
I'll remove it from the main 3.x tree and make it a revolution ( move it
to proposals), so nobody can complain about it and anyone who's
interested can use it. From my point of view it's great code and it would
be great to have it available in 3.3.
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
