Considering all expressed opinions (Costin included) I think
Christopher already wrapped up the whole mess going on here in a
previous post, and I quote:
AFAIK, everyone is in agreement that all bug entries will be in
one of the CLOSED states (RESOLVED, POSTPONED, or CAN'T-REPRODUCE)
before the gold-code in _either_ tree is released. So perhaps the
release plans should be modified to explicily state this, then we
can all get back to the business of congratulating each other on
our releases =)
On the state of 3.3:
I do not use any very exotic features and never came across a clear
Tomcat bug (except in the new admin pages). However I already tried
using JServ and several Tomcat 3.1.x and 3.2.x versions and my
favorite container is 3.3 since (at least) Milestone 1. I used it
for development even before M1 and I am using it on a production
server since M4.
I will never detected a whole class of bugs since I avoid a lot of
trouble by using no connectors - it is simpler to use Apache as a
Proxy and for us that is good enough.
Still, since we use 3.3, every time a Tomcat site stopped working the
problem was somewhere else (usually because the native database
connection pool stuff we were using sucks and does not recover from
network glitches and database restarts - moving to commons-dbcp now!).
OTOH:
- With Tomcat 3.2.x we had it freezing for no clear reason;
- With JServ we had connector related problems.
>From JServ, Tomcat 3.2.x and Tomcat 3.3, 3.3 is the only one giving
me NO run time trouble and also (by far) the easiest one to setup.
You didn't think I defended 3.3 just to nag Jon, did you?
> You know, Gaspar makes a very good point when he says that it is
> sometimes necessary to look past the somewhat ... less-than-diplomatic =)
...
> presentation, and find the heart of a Jon argument, because it
> almost always contains valuable insight and sound advice.
This is true... although I would use "quite often" instead of "almost
always".
=;o)
I already mentioned before that I learned a lot with Jon. I just keep
complaining because I would like him to make the process easier.
Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Cain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:42 AM
>
>
> Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Christopher Cain wrote:
> >
> > > > I don't know what 'long enough' means, my impression is that we had
> > a
> > > > far too long release cycle for 3.3 already.
> > >
> > > Don't worry Costin, he doesn't really know what it means either :)
> >
> > Well, giving the bug reports he filled so far - he seems to know very
> > well
> > what we're talking about, so even if he's not a commiter, his -1
> > matters
> > more than Jon's ( at least for me ).
>
> You know, Gaspar makes a very good point when he says that it is
> sometimes
> necessary to look past the somewhat ... less-than-diplomatic =) ...
> presentation, and find the heart of a Jon argument, because it
> almost always
> contains valuable insight and sound advice. Perhaps the -1 was a
> little heavy-
> handed, but concerns about the state of bugzilla when a product
> ships is a
> reasonable point of view that at least deserves your attention.
> To dismiss what
> he says because it is not packaged with a shiny bow, or because
> you two do not
> get along, is to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
>
> > Costin
> >
> > ( BTW, thanks again William for helping with the test of tomcat and
> > for
> > the bug reports )
>
> And I, too, think that William deserves a great deal of thanks
> for the time and
> energy he invests in testing Tomcat and filling out bug reports.
> That's just as
> vital to the success of the project as anything you and I do, in
> my opinion.
>
> Perhaps I did come down a little hard, but I take two things very
> seriously:
> Tomcat's reputation as a world-class engine, and the reputation
> of my fellow
> developers and the people I call friends. By implying that 3.3 was being
> released prematurely for political reasons, Mr. Barker was
> treading dangerously
> close to insulting both. Since he decided not to offer any further
> clarification or explanation on what he meant by his statements,
> I don't know
> if it was an intentional accusation, an unfortunate choice of
> words, or what.
>
> But apparently I am the only one who took offense, so in the
> spirit of all of
> this unprecidented cooperation and mutual respect, I'll shut up
> now. Hell, 3.3
> isn't even my primary development tree (although I do try and
> port my patches
> there on occasion :-), and he's being defended by none other than
> the father of
> 3.3 himself, so far be it from me to intrude on whatever rather
> curious social
> dynamics you guys have at work over there. Larry is just one of
> the nicest guys
> you'll ever meet, and he really took me under his wing when I
> first got here,
> so perhaps I got a little rabid in defending him ... What?!? _Me_
> engage in
> verbal tounge-lashings in the course of defending someone?!?
> Never heard of
> such a thing ;-)
>
> Anyway, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled 3.3/4.0,
> Pier/Henri,
> York/Lancaster reconciliation. :)
>
> - Christopher
>
> /**
> * Pleurez, pleurez, mes yeux, et fondez vous en eau!
> * La moitié de ma vie a mis l'autre au tombeau.
> * ---Corneille
> */
>
