jon * wrote:
<snip>
> We started a project around last October using Turbine without any major
> issues.
I agree. Turbine is fairly solid. This is why I think we should
progress towards a release. I have no problems using Turbine for
serious work.
> > I'm also interested in seeing a development path to a Java2 environment
> > for Turbine and also JServ, which I know you can conjole it to work
> > but I'd prefer a stable environment.
>
> What exactly does that mean ("development path to a Java2 environment")?
> Turbine runs just fine in a Java2 environment.
>
> > But then, I hear you say, use Tomcat and Jakarta, etc for Java2 platform,
>
> Jakarta is a project. Tomcat is a servlet engine. I never said use Tomcat
> for Java2. If it helps you any, I have never personally used Tomcat at all,
> period. I still use Apache JServ 1.1.
Ha. That is funny!
> > well, it is also in development stage and In don't know if Turbine will
> > work with them since there are some JServ dependent features in
> > Turbine (what what I've read anyway) ...
>
> I have no clue as to what you are talking about. There is nothing in JServ
> that Turbine is directly dependent on. We have everything that may be
> dependent already copied within the Turbine CVS tree so there are no issues
> with that since the classloader will find those classes.
There are no differences really. You can run Turbine under Tomcat just
fine.
> Turbine will run just fine with any JSDK 2.0 or higher (including Tomcat)
> servlet engine. Period.
>
> Tomcat also is not Java2 dependent. Neither is Turbine. Both will run just
> fine in a Java2 environment. I would use Java2 only because the JVM's are
> better than Java1.
--
Kevin A Burton
http://relativity.yi.org
Linux - You *will* be assimilated.
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
