Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Roger Riggs]

Hi Ashton,

Your optimism seems misplaced;  I heard several suggestions that you 
pick another
web server to depend on.  The http server is an unsupported utility; 
nothing more.


BTW, my mailer marks this email as a possible scam because the link is 
malformed.


Also, the mention of jdk6 is an anachronism; any version less than 8 or 
9 is ancient history

in JDK development.

Regards, Roger

On 2/21/2018 8:39 AM, Ashton Hogan wrote:
Based on the responses received so far, it sounds like there are no 
reservations about the below 4 points. I believe it's safe to assume 
that everyone is in agreement that the below 4 points are good to go with


On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 16:15:56 GMT, Ashton Hogan 
 wrote:



These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping 
the code at Oracle clean and up to standard:


1. Update to HTTP2
2. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed
3. Replace handler with a FIFO queue
4. Clean up code, ideally with http://elegantobjects.org 
 principles


If you disagree on any of them please reply with *why *and *what *the 
alternative should be

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Ashton Hogan]

 Based on the responses received so far, it sounds like there are no 
reservations about the below 4 points. I believe it's safe to assume that 
everyone is in agreement that the below 4 points are good to go with
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 16:15:56 GMT, Ashton Hogan 
 wrote:  
 
  These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping the 
code at Oracle clean and up to standard:

1. Update to HTTP22. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed3. Replace 
handler with a FIFO queue4. Clean up code, ideally with 
http://elegantobjects.org principles
If you disagree on any of them please reply with why and what the alternative 
should be  

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Ashton Hogan]

 > I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and
you would do well to remember that.
I agree, no one owes anyone anything. That's why I'm trying to make an offer to 
do the work at a cost or take the code and distribute under a different 
license. I'm offering a business deal, not asking for charity.
> You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread.
Thanks for your help, enjoy your day
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 20:49:50 GMT, David Lloyd 
 wrote:  
 
 On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Ashton Hogan  wrote:
> David, I understand that you don't use this feature of the JDK and that's
> absolutely fine. I'm not the type of person to impose my way of doing things
> on anyone. I hope that you aren't either. There are obviously many people in
> the community that DO love and use this httpserver for many reasons that I
> won't go into here as that is not the point of this discussion.
>
> IIRC JDK is backward compatible so highly unlikely that it's going to be
> removed.

The specification parts of the JDK are backwards compatible but the
HTTP server is not part of the Java SE specification; nevertheless,
even things that were part of the SE specification (CORBA, and the
other EE modules) have been removed for Java 11 so I wouldn't put all
my eggs in that basket.

> If you did find a way to remove it, I would also be open to having
> the source code donated to myself to refactor and rebuild under a different
> license. I'd be open to discussing this in more detail as well if need be.

I consider this unlikely as that's a question for the copyright
holders; however, you can fork this code even so, as it is available
under GPL+classpath as well as CDDL.  Talk to your lawyer about
options, and I think you'll find you have several.

> Going back to the original discussion, you mention that points 2, 3 and 4
> are subjective. As per my original request, please do put forward your
> points of view so that they can be discussed in more detail if you believe
> that they are wrong.

No thank you; I am not personally interested in this code.  I only
replied as a service to you, to help you understand the OpenJDK
community process a little bit better.

> Pragmatically speaking, the development can be done on your end to improve
> the JDK OR on my end at a cost. I'm open to either.

OK, sounds good.

> Please do try and stay on topic in future responses.

Ashton, I observe that you are not doing a great job at your first
engagement of an open source community.  I don't really have any dogs
in this race, other than to maybe guide you a little bit, but at this
point I'd suggest you "check yourself".  Coming into any community and
immediately making demands without any attempts to understand the
existing culture is not a great way to get started; you will only
alienate people (like me, now).  I do not owe you anything, nor would
I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and
you would do well to remember that.

You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread.

-- 
- DML
  

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[David Lloyd]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Ashton Hogan  wrote:
> David, I understand that you don't use this feature of the JDK and that's
> absolutely fine. I'm not the type of person to impose my way of doing things
> on anyone. I hope that you aren't either. There are obviously many people in
> the community that DO love and use this httpserver for many reasons that I
> won't go into here as that is not the point of this discussion.
>
> IIRC JDK is backward compatible so highly unlikely that it's going to be
> removed.

The specification parts of the JDK are backwards compatible but the
HTTP server is not part of the Java SE specification; nevertheless,
even things that were part of the SE specification (CORBA, and the
other EE modules) have been removed for Java 11 so I wouldn't put all
my eggs in that basket.

> If you did find a way to remove it, I would also be open to having
> the source code donated to myself to refactor and rebuild under a different
> license. I'd be open to discussing this in more detail as well if need be.

I consider this unlikely as that's a question for the copyright
holders; however, you can fork this code even so, as it is available
under GPL+classpath as well as CDDL.  Talk to your lawyer about
options, and I think you'll find you have several.

> Going back to the original discussion, you mention that points 2, 3 and 4
> are subjective. As per my original request, please do put forward your
> points of view so that they can be discussed in more detail if you believe
> that they are wrong.

No thank you; I am not personally interested in this code.  I only
replied as a service to you, to help you understand the OpenJDK
community process a little bit better.

> Pragmatically speaking, the development can be done on your end to improve
> the JDK OR on my end at a cost. I'm open to either.

OK, sounds good.

> Please do try and stay on topic in future responses.

Ashton, I observe that you are not doing a great job at your first
engagement of an open source community.  I don't really have any dogs
in this race, other than to maybe guide you a little bit, but at this
point I'd suggest you "check yourself".  Coming into any community and
immediately making demands without any attempts to understand the
existing culture is not a great way to get started; you will only
alienate people (like me, now).  I do not owe you anything, nor would
I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and
you would do well to remember that.

You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread.

-- 
- DML

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Ashton Hogan]

 Thanks Alan, I'm aware of these options.
Again, I'll refer you to the 4 points that this discussion was intended for.
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 20:22:05 GMT, Alan Bateman 
 wrote:  
 
 On 20/02/2018 19:52, David Lloyd wrote:
> enough that the internal server is
> almost a legacy artifact at this point (after all it was IIRC only
> introduced to support the in-JDK web services classes which may soon
> be dropped from the JDK altogether).
Yes, the original motive for this small HTTP server was to support 
JAX-WS callbacks. It turned out to be really useful for tests and 
embedding too. It was never meant to be anything more than that of 
course, there are lots of options available for those looking for a more 
functional and scalable HTTP server.

-Alan
  

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Alan Bateman]

On 20/02/2018 19:52, David Lloyd wrote:

enough that the internal server is
almost a legacy artifact at this point (after all it was IIRC only
introduced to support the in-JDK web services classes which may soon
be dropped from the JDK altogether).
Yes, the original motive for this small HTTP server was to support 
JAX-WS callbacks. It turned out to be really useful for tests and 
embedding too. It was never meant to be anything more than that of 
course, there are lots of options available for those looking for a more 
functional and scalable HTTP server.


-Alan

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Ashton Hogan]

 David, I understand that you don't use this feature of the JDK and that's 
absolutely fine. I'm not the type of person to impose my way of doing things on 
anyone. I hope that you aren't either. There are obviously many people in the 
community that DO love and use this httpserver for many reasons that I won't go 
into here as that is not the point of this discussion.
IIRC JDK is backward compatible so highly unlikely that it's going to be 
removed. If you did find a way to remove it, I would also be open to having the 
source code donated to myself to refactor and rebuild under a different 
license. I'd be open to discussing this in more detail as well if need be.
Going back to the original discussion, you mention that points 2, 3 and 4 are 
subjective. As per my original request, please do put forward your points of 
view so that they can be discussed in more detail if you believe that they are 
wrong.
Pragmatically speaking, the development can be done on your end to improve the 
JDK OR on my end at a cost. I'm open to either.
Please do try and stay on topic in future responses.
Thanks & RegardsAshton


On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 19:52:55 GMT, David Lloyd 
 wrote:  
 
 Ashton, I don't think anyone disagrees with your four points at a high
level (though #4 might be a bit subjective, and #2 and #3 are
obviously design points that would theoretically be subject to
debate).

However, at the same time, you're not really going to see anyone
lining up and clamoring for a major rewrite of the JDK's HTTP server
right now, or maybe ever again.  And the reason is exactly that there
are many external options now - enough that the internal server is
almost a legacy artifact at this point (after all it was IIRC only
introduced to support the in-JDK web services classes which may soon
be dropped from the JDK altogether).  And I think that you are
definitely not going to inspire anyone to suddenly contribute effort
to overhauling it by listing off a couple of super-high-level
requirements.

That said, if you want to breathe life back into it, your best bet is
probably incremental improvement along a well-defined road map.  Based
on my perspective, I still wouldn't be super hopeful that the OpenJDK
maintainers would be really interested at this point (particularly in
major changes), but if you really like the code base for some reason,
you also have the option of forking it.  Particularly speaking, I
don't think you'll find many people who are interested in engaging in
any sort of design debate about it at this stage of its life.

Hope this helps.


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Ashton Hogan  wrote:
> Hi Rob
>
> Can you please read what I initially asked again, I'm not asking about new
> frameworks or web servers. I'm stating 4 points that need to be addressed in
> the EXISTING jdk6 web server. Again, if you disagree with any of these 4
> points can you please state WHY and WHAT the alternative to the respective
> POINT is
>
> On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 17:18:20 GMT, Rob McKenna
>  wrote:
>
>
> W.r.t. alternatives the HTTP serving landscape on the JVM is rich and
> diverse at this point. Projects worth a look include Grizzly, Netty, Jetty,
> Tomcat, Undertow, Rapidoid and the many cool frameworks build on top of
> these technologies. (e.g.  Jooby, SparkJava, Play to name a few)
>
>    -Rob
>
> On 20/02/18 16:15, Ashton Hogan wrote:
>>  These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping
>> the code at Oracle clean and up to standard:
>>
>> 1. Update to HTTP22. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed3.
>> Replace handler with a FIFO queue4. Clean up code, ideally with
>> http://elegantobjects.org principles
>> If you disagree on any of them please reply with why and what the
>> alternative should be



-- 
- DML
  

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[David Lloyd]

Ashton, I don't think anyone disagrees with your four points at a high
level (though #4 might be a bit subjective, and #2 and #3 are
obviously design points that would theoretically be subject to
debate).

However, at the same time, you're not really going to see anyone
lining up and clamoring for a major rewrite of the JDK's HTTP server
right now, or maybe ever again.  And the reason is exactly that there
are many external options now - enough that the internal server is
almost a legacy artifact at this point (after all it was IIRC only
introduced to support the in-JDK web services classes which may soon
be dropped from the JDK altogether).  And I think that you are
definitely not going to inspire anyone to suddenly contribute effort
to overhauling it by listing off a couple of super-high-level
requirements.

That said, if you want to breathe life back into it, your best bet is
probably incremental improvement along a well-defined road map.  Based
on my perspective, I still wouldn't be super hopeful that the OpenJDK
maintainers would be really interested at this point (particularly in
major changes), but if you really like the code base for some reason,
you also have the option of forking it.  Particularly speaking, I
don't think you'll find many people who are interested in engaging in
any sort of design debate about it at this stage of its life.

Hope this helps.


On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:24 AM, Ashton Hogan  wrote:
> Hi Rob
>
> Can you please read what I initially asked again, I'm not asking about new
> frameworks or web servers. I'm stating 4 points that need to be addressed in
> the EXISTING jdk6 web server. Again, if you disagree with any of these 4
> points can you please state WHY and WHAT the alternative to the respective
> POINT is
>
> On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 17:18:20 GMT, Rob McKenna
>  wrote:
>
>
> W.r.t. alternatives the HTTP serving landscape on the JVM is rich and
> diverse at this point. Projects worth a look include Grizzly, Netty, Jetty,
> Tomcat, Undertow, Rapidoid and the many cool frameworks build on top of
> these technologies. (e.g.  Jooby, SparkJava, Play to name a few)
>
> -Rob
>
> On 20/02/18 16:15, Ashton Hogan wrote:
>>  These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping
>> the code at Oracle clean and up to standard:
>>
>> 1. Update to HTTP22. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed3.
>> Replace handler with a FIFO queue4. Clean up code, ideally with
>> http://elegantobjects.org principles
>> If you disagree on any of them please reply with why and what the
>> alternative should be



-- 
- DML

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Ashton Hogan]

 Hi Rob
Can you please read what I initially asked again, I'm not asking about new 
frameworks or web servers. I'm stating 4 points that need to be addressed in 
the EXISTING jdk6 web server. Again, if you disagree with any of these 4 points 
can you please state WHY and WHAT the alternative to the respective POINT is
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 17:18:20 GMT, Rob McKenna 
 wrote:  
 
 W.r.t. alternatives the HTTP serving landscape on the JVM is rich and
diverse at this point. Projects worth a look include Grizzly, Netty, Jetty,
Tomcat, Undertow, Rapidoid and the many cool frameworks build on top of
these technologies. (e.g.  Jooby, SparkJava, Play to name a few)

    -Rob

On 20/02/18 16:15, Ashton Hogan wrote:
>  These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping the 
>code at Oracle clean and up to standard:
> 
> 1. Update to HTTP22. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed3. 
> Replace handler with a FIFO queue4. Clean up code, ideally with 
> http://elegantobjects.org principles
> If you disagree on any of them please reply with why and what the alternative 
> should be
  

Re: upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Rob McKenna]

W.r.t. alternatives the HTTP serving landscape on the JVM is rich and
diverse at this point. Projects worth a look include Grizzly, Netty, Jetty,
Tomcat, Undertow, Rapidoid and the many cool frameworks build on top of
these technologies. (e.g.  Jooby, SparkJava, Play to name a few)

-Rob

On 20/02/18 16:15, Ashton Hogan wrote:
>  These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping the 
> code at Oracle clean and up to standard:
> 
> 1. Update to HTTP22. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed3. 
> Replace handler with a FIFO queue4. Clean up code, ideally with 
> http://elegantobjects.org principles
> If you disagree on any of them please reply with why and what the alternative 
> should be

upgrade to jdk6 com.sun.httpserver

[Ashton Hogan]

 These items are essential to keeping the server up to date and keeping the 
code at Oracle clean and up to standard:

1. Update to HTTP22. Remove excess threads, only one thread is needed3. Replace 
handler with a FIFO queue4. Clean up code, ideally with 
http://elegantobjects.org principles
If you disagree on any of them please reply with why and what the alternative 
should be