> they were. Jon, you might
> be annoying and obnoxious at times, but those kids
> don't even care about reading what you're writing...
Too bad all this is on an open mailing list where the
mails can be read again and again - and people may
form their own opinions.
> _exactly_ happening: from what I see in the commit
> messages, it seems to me
> that even if on an evolutionary track, the container
> structure is completely
> different between 3.2 and 3.3. The architecture is
> almost as different as
> 3.2 and 4.0.
It's sad that on this list so many people are experts
in spinning facts and politics.
This is a _false_ statement, or a gross
misunderstanding of what "architecture" means and what
"refactoring" means.
The _architecture_, _ideas_ and _patterns_ in tomcat3
are the same - the code, code organization changed.
I just had to deal with a major change in Apache2.0 -
it seems some time ago they reorganized the whole
tree,
moved apr in a different repository, etc. Is this a
different architecture ?
And looking back to Apache1.3 - most of the concepts
are still there - you have more flexibility with the
hooks and mpms, but I hope you're not claiming that
moving from 1.3 to 2.0 will be as hard as moving from
Apache to IIS.
And one more - Tomcat3.2 is also a refactoring of
Tomcat3.1. Refactoring == improving code readability,
better organization - same design.
If tomcat3.2 is indeed "better" and user are well
served by moving from 3.1 to 3.2 - the same will be
true for 3.3
> others, they are all so busy in rearchitecting the
> container, and
> back-porting features from 4.0 that they don't have
> time to maintain the old
That's even worse - all the flames that start up
whenever code from 4.0 is reused in 3.x. What's the
problem ??? Are you afraid of "featurism" ( i.e. are
good for 4.0 but bad for 3.3 ) ?
It's open source code, and it's right to reuse it
instead of reinventing the wheel. If someone writes a
JAAS authenticator for 4.0 - why not making it
available to 3.3 users too ?
After all, if 4.0 is "better", that's because of the
architecture, not because of the features - or else
next spin will be that people should use 4.0 because
of all the features.
In any case, I made clear that all those "features"
will not be checked into 3.3 - but on an external
tomcat-contrib-like repository.
> This is not what's happening. You're not
> fixing them, you're
> re-architecting a new container on the ashes of 3.2,
> but you are not doing
> what you promised ME, you're not supporting your
> baby...
Take a look at "changes" in tomcat 3.3. It's a
description of all the "evolutions" from 3.2 to 3.3.
Too bad I haven't done the same when I worked on 3.2.
You can also take a look at commit messages - yes,
some are big ( code moved around for better
organization ),
and some deprecated interfaces are removed ( is this
an "architecutre change" ? They were introduced in
3.2, 3.1 or 3.0 to help refactoring, and "evolved"
into something better ).
Costin
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
