On Sun, 2 Dec 2001 08:03, Jon Stevens wrote:
> on 12/1/01 10:08 AM, "Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi, tomcat users and developrs!
> >>
> >> /* I have post this patch twice. This is third time. */
> >>
> >> Do you know kjc which is one of the completely opensource Java
> >> compi
mons in the Java Language and with the help of
> the community, will be improved and enhanced.
>
> I believe that this expert group went too far, forgetting its roots, and
> the real problems that we needed to solve.
>
> Also, another problem I faced while working with this grou
At 03:13 27/1/01 +0100, Paulo Gaspar wrote:
>Bruce Eckel on his book "Thinking in Java" states that a simple method call
>(no parameters) takes 5.9 units of time while a synchronized method call
>takes
>570. OTOH, object creation takes 980 which makes it an even worse
>alternative.
Depends on th
At 01:09 22/1/01 +, PSA wrote:
>> Under windows it gets it's events from a multitude of different sources
>> (some are grabbed from eventqueue, others from win32 hooks and others are
>> application created) then routes them through a central message queue and
>> central dispatching model. In
At 10:49 24/1/01 -0800, Jon Stevens wrote:
>on 1/24/01 10:06 AM, "Larry Isaacs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It should be noted that when this plan comes up for a vote, a +1 by a
>> committer will constitute a commitment not only to helping with the
release,
>> but to provide maintenance suppo
At 11:08 23/1/01 +1100, Geoff Soutter wrote:
>Any ideas how we can effectively deal with opinionated people without
>muzzling them?
don't bother responding to them unless they do things the right way. email
them OFF list stating this in a very diplomatic way. Watch them explode and
then hopefull
At 04:34 21/1/01 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>The precise answer to what works depends on how your particular class
loader is
>implemented. My experience (although this classloading stuff is "black
magic" at
>times) is that URLClassLoader, which is what Tomcat 4.0 uses, follows the
process
At 04:08 21/1/01 -0800, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>Sealing is one "user error" issue that will cause classloading to fail inside
>Tomcat. Another is the fact that a particular class can only see other
classes
>in its own classloaders, and parents of that classloader, but not
children. The
>net
At 12:24 19/1/01 +0100, Ceki Gulcu wrote:
>1) The new appender should have flexible way of expressing the rollover
>frequency, perhaps in the same format as in the Unix crontabs file which I
>belive is also a Posix standard. I am not aware of any library that
>supports this. JDring (http://web
Hi,
At 12:29 19/1/01 +0100, Paulo Gaspar wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 23:04
>>
>> One appropriate question to ask yourself, when comparing, is
>> "what does having 15
>> entry points give me tha
At 12:30 18/1/01 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>2. It seems he made a distinction between +1 ( I support the plan or
>release ) and "commited" +1 ( I support the plan _and_ I commit to help).
I understood the first case to be a +0 - ie nice idea but I ain't gonna put
any effort into maintainin
At 12:52 17/1/01 -0800, Randall Parker wrote:
>Peter,
>
>Amazingly expensive. Calling from the US to Australia is incredibly cheap
by comparison. Check out:
> http://1010phonerates.com/aus_etc.html
I found some cheaper options (75c a minute daytime, 20c a minute at certain
periods at night) but
Hi,
I noticed that the list is starting to devolve a little so perhaps the
opinion of a complete outsider with no bias (that I am aware of) could help ;)
>From what I understand the main objections of a 3.2 are
1. You don't want to have 2 different containers implementing 2.3 under Apache
2. You
At 11:04 15/1/01 +0100, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
>Yes 3.3 = 3.2 + .1, no more a revolution (allready acted) but a necessary
>evolution. The revolution will be TC 4.0 but when will it be available for
>production (connectors and extensive testing). Also TC 4.0 need many
>externals
>stuff to build (ie JM
At 12:10 15/1/01 -0800, Jon Stevens wrote:
>Actually NOTHING has been debated OR decided on any of the closed lists. I
>wonder how many times I (and others) need to repeat that to you before you
>actually hear and acknowledge it.
every time it arises or there is conflict - thats the joy of close
At 05:48 14/1/01 -0800, Jon Stevens wrote:
>> I know it's out of context but this neatly summarizes it doesn't it ;) What
>> you may ask - well let me elaborate. When I first started working with
>> Apache peeps it was great - I never heard any complaints or had any issues.
>> It was Stefano who
At 05:43 13/1/01 -0800, Hans Bergsten wrote:
>If you have any interest in the future of the Jakarta project, I think you
>should come.
I know it's out of context but this neatly summarizes it doesn't it ;) What
you may ask - well let me elaborate. When I first started working with
Apache peeps
ionAction;
import java.security.PrivilegedActionException;
import java.security.cert.Certificate;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Enumeration;
import java.util.PropertyPermission;
import org.apache.avalon.util.io.FileUtil;
import org.apache.avalon.Component;
import org.apache.avalon.Loggable;
import org.a
At 07:22 12/1/01 -0600, Nick Bauman wrote:
>Somewhat unrelated, I hear a lot of people going gaga over XSLT for web
>development. I understand the desire: a single document represents the
>data of the page, while other documents are used to convert that data for
>different clients / views with an
At 04:42 11/1/01 +0100, GOMEZ Henri wrote:
>Hi to all Suners.
>
>I finished some time ago RPM for jaxp 1.0.1 and jaxp 1.1 EARLY ADOPTERs.
>Who could do something to have these RPMS available at Sun or Apache
>site ?
Unfortunately it's not legal to have jaxp1.1 available via apache as there
is 6
At 06:11 10/1/01 -0800, GoldenDawn Fan wrote:
>Hi, is there a pre-set spec?? And where can I get
>source code...?
Source code via CVS - detaiks at http://jakarta.apache.org/site/cvsindex.html
You should also browse
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/guidelines.html
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/
Hi there,
At 03:39 10/1/01 -0800, GoldenDawn Fan wrote:
>Hi, I'd very much like to participate in developing
>tomcat. Where should I start? Can someone please et
>me know?
The best way is to start reading the mailing list, fiddling with code and
asking questions. When you think you understa
we have to derive:
>usefulness(jBoss)+usefulness(Tomcat) <= 0.
>;-)
or you have outsiders like me who use neither product ;)
>Peter Donald wrote:
>> >| I think it would definitely be safe to download a set of RPMs (one
>> >|per product) and then install th
At 01:39 29/10/00 -0800, marc fleury wrote:
...some truly misguided stuff...
Oh - so I take that as "No I haven't contacted lawyers nor anyone who knows
what they are talking about". Well considering you have been made aware on
a publically archived list you really will have no defense in court
At 08:55 29/10/00 +0100, Rickard Öberg wrote:
>Jon Stevens wrote:
>>
>> on 10/28/2000 5:22 PM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Once RMS finds out
>> > about the project misusing the GPL he will start advocating all the GN
>| What can I say? I agree that this is a reasonable interpretation.
>|But I don't think it's the only interpretation, and I'm not sure it's even
>|the interpretation intended by the authors. There's another section that
>|specifically allows distribution of GPL and non-GPL programs on the
> The problem is, I'm in a situation where (to quote "Ronin"),
>"Whenever there's a doubt, there is no doubt." Whatever you say, I
>haven't heard anything that convinces me that the interpretation is clear
>- I can easily see both sides of the disagreement. I suspect the only way
>for this
At 04:35 28/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>on 10/28/2000 4:06 PM, "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Indeed if the Avalon guy puts jBoss code in his tree and "contains" our
work
>> in his work then yeah.. that needs to be GPL.
>
>Bingo. So, this is something that is a major problem for me.
At 02:18 28/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>on 10/28/2000 10:05 AM, "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I am sorry, I should actually provide some information.
>>
>> We use the GPL to protect the kernel. The virality of the GPL applies to
>> the "derived work" or "modified work as a whole" o
At 02:06 28/10/00 -0700, Jon Stevens wrote:
>on 10/27/2000 10:10 PM, "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> | but at the same time, you have a problem with the GPL being
>> |viral so you give exceptions for people to use JBoss. Instead, what you
>> |should do is probably be using the MPL l
>> I am sorry, I should actually provide some information.
>>
>> We use the GPL to protect the kernel. The virality of the GPL applies to
>> the "derived work" or "modified work as a whole" of the kernel.
ummm - hello ? - you should seek legal advice as this is NOT what the GPL
saids. It was de
Hi,
I figured I may respond because I may be one of those you think are being
religious and I aren't .. honest ;)
At 07:18 27/10/00 -0700, Jon Stevens wrote:
>on 10/27/2000 4:47 PM, "marc fleury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Re: the licenses. I read many of the arguments regarding the license
32 matches
Mail list logo
