[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The point is not about developing multiple implementations - but about > beeing a part of the community and proposing/discussing changes instead > of posting announcements of a fork's releases. >
Costin, My response got to be way too long, so here's just a summary. It comes off as a bit clipped, but that's because it's short, not because the questions were unreasonable :-) - I did discuss MinTC/MinimalTomcat on the dev list, check the archives. The topic didn't seem very popular, but I took that to mean I had weird requirements that few others shared. Later on, I started making announcements as a way to generate discussion and keep the core developers up-to-date. - It's not a fork. If it were a fork, I wouldn't care about the core code. But it's not, so I do. It's not Tomcat 4, but it is, by any reasonable definition, a version of Catalina. - It was always my intention to propose donating the code back to Apache, I should have been more clear about this. But I wanted to wait for the 1.0 release, for obvious reasons. - MinTC is not competition for Tomcat. You would have to be frigging insane to use MinTC if you could possibly use Tomcat 4 instead. But sometimes Tomcat 4 is difficult or impossible to use. That's not because Tomcat 4 is bad, it's just that it's full featured. I didn't think a patch to remove MBeans, JNDI and auto-deployment from the core would be well received :-) If you're interested, there's more detail on the MinTC page. Thanks for your feedback, -- Christopher St. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] DistribuTopia http://www.distributopia.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
