We are about to release an application using Turbine 2.2. > And yet they are going to run the latest release of Turbine? > The use of turbine and the use of a servlet 2.2 container are totally different things in my clients mind.
Without wanting or needing to go into too much detail, my company can use pretty much whatever we want to build the application, since we maintain the application. We have full control over that. We don't have as much control over the platform, container, app server, and databases used. The application server/servlet container etc. are infrastructure pieces that they license (it's not a stretch to say they would NEVER run a free web server), and pay Big Blue to manage. They would never use something like tomcat because 1) they can't license it from someone, and 2) big blue can't provide competent people to manage a tomcat installation. > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Eade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 9:08 PM > To: turbine-user > Subject: Re: [POLL] Servlet API 2.3 > > > And yet they are going to run the latest release of Turbine? > > Which version do they use currently? > > Scott > -- > Scott Eade > Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd. > http://www.backstagetech.com.au > .Mac Chat/AIM: seade at mac dot com > > On 14/01/2003 1:50 PM, "Skip Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > oops, forgot to make that clear. Myself, well, not myself, my large > > (fortune 500) client that doesn't change things very easily > is running > > servlet 2.2 containers all over the place. All of the > applications we work > > on are running on 2.2 containers currently. Heck they > still run web sphere > > 3.5, which isn't even 2.2 compliant. > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Scott Eade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 6:21 PM > >> To: turbine-user > >> Subject: Re: [POLL] Servlet API 2.3 > >> > >> > >> On 14/01/2003 11:09 AM, "Arthur I. Walker" > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> I'm assuming Turbine 2.3 will contain issues relating to the whole > >>> backporting of fulcrum, the methodology for extending > Turbine User, > >>> enhancements to Intake. These are the issues I thought 2.3 would > >>> contain. > >>> > >>> What's the case raising the platform requirements for Turbine? > >> The poll is assessing if there is a case to *not* raise > the platform > >> requirements for turbine as part of Turbine 2.3. Servlet > >> containers that > >> support Servlet 2.3 have been about for a very long time (the > >> tdk *2.1* > >> shipped with one). > >> > >> Nobody, not even you, has yet indicated that they are > using a servlet > >> container that does not support Servlet 2.3. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Scott > >> -- > >> Scott Eade > >> Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd. > >> http://www.backstagetech.com.au > >> .Mac Chat/AIM: seade at mac dot com > >> > >> > >> -- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
