Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > 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.
Oh, that's why I flame people on the ML and not mailbomb them privately!
> > _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.
And surely you're a master on this... How you're able to twist facts and
promises is somehow intriguing.
> 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.
Doesn't seem like that to me...
> 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 ?
Apache 2.0 is not yet OUT in final... Try to go down in HTTP land and
build a 1.4 on the ashes of 1.3 but with a whole new architecture.. I
wonder what the peeps down there would say...
> > 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 ) ?
That's TWISTED. Holy shit, you don't even care about supporting our
users. Jesus Lord! Every single feature you back port from 4.0 will need
to be supported in BOTH 3.3 and 4.0 and that means doubling our efforts
in bug tracking and issue solving.
You're not even doing that for 3.2, why the hack would you care to do it
for 3.3. The 3.2.1 release, MAJOR SECURITY HOLES was made by Craig while
dodging a M5 release for Catalina... DO YOU SEE THAT? YOU ARE THE FIRST
ONE WHO FUCKING DROPPED 3.2 TO GO ON 3.3.
> 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, if you want to work on an evolutionary track, go on and help
Craig in supporting 3.2 and making it better. If you want to go on your
own do a 3.3, I don't care what you do in your time. But my -1 stands on
3.3 and +1 on bugfixing 3.2.
You didn't prove me wrong.
Pier
--
Pier Fumagalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier>
