on 12/18/2000 11:47 AM, "David Rees" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It really is part of the same issue. Because Greg is not willing to jump to
> 4.0, the idea of continuing development on the 3.x branch (work towards 3.3)
> is welcome and reassuring. There will likely be some issues with porting
> applications to 4.0 which can't be easily resolved.
There are no issues with porting to 4.0. I just took an app developed on 3.x
and moved it to 4.0 without any problems.
> I see no problems with Costin (and others) continuing work on the 3.3
> release, especially considering his recent comments about doing development
> on Tomcat with the Apache group:
>
> Costin said (quoting Jon):
>>> simply fork what you are doing into another project
>>> that is hosted somewhere else.
>> It's the second time an Apache member is asking me to
>> go somewhere else. Believe me, right now it's my
>> biggest wish - I've had more than enough !
>
> The way I see it, having Costin stopping work on the 3.x tree won't free up
> any substantial amount of resources for the 4.x tree. Costin doesn't seem
> to be planning on any future development on Tomcat after 3.3 is done!
Ok, so great...3.3 is done and Costin disappears. What happens then? I wait
around for someone else to pick up the effort while everyone else is working
on and using 4.0?
> Either way, what does it matter if Costin is doing development work on the
> 3.x tree under Apache or under his own project?
Because of the split of resources.
> Frankly, I am disappointed in the development process of Tomcat. I posted a
> simple documentation patch (See bug report 528) two weeks ago for the FAQ
> included with the Tomcat 3.x and posted a couple messages about it. I
> haven't heard a thing about it and saw the release of 3.2.1 come and go
> without the documentation fix.
HELLO! DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I think it is so funny that you mention this.
Lets see, I see Craig and Remy constantly adding patches to Tomcat 4.0 as
soon as they come in, but because we have this split of effort working on
two tree's, your patches probably have gotten overlooked because people were
way to busy working on the fact that we have a forked development tree.
My point is that it is way to confusing for a volunteer organization to
support this split tree like this and it needs to stop!
Lastly, to add one more bit to the fire...Sun's position appears to follow
Craig's at this point since he is the lead engineer on the J2EE Servlet
Engine. What would you rather go with? The Engine that is part of J2EE or
the engine that is a fork and worked on after work hours by essentially one
guy?
thanks,
-jon
--
Honk if you love peace and quiet.
