I also agree that Tomcat should support as many platform as possible regardless of its J2SE version according to the philosophy of Java. Definitely Servlet 2.4 API wants Java 2(i.e. J2SE 1.2 or later), so it is enough for Tomcat to require at least J2SE 1.2 essentially.
The problem is JSP 2.0. In this sense, we can consider some idea that Tomcat 5 supports JSP 2.0 or not dynamically and configurably. For example, if Tomcat's JAVA_HOME is sort of J2SE 1.4, it supports JSP 2.0. Otherwise, it doesn't (actually can't) support JSP 2.0. However, Tomcat's Servlet API is the same: 2.4. In terms of distributing and building, we can imagine one Tomcat 5 binary and source format for both J2SE 1.3(or earlier) and J2SE 1.4(or later). I think we have several choices to resolve that and believe finally Tomcat 5 will be good-shaped. IAS Independent Java Technology Evangelist (Korea) http://www.iasandcb.pe.kr -----Original Message----- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Costin Manolache Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 3:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [5.0] [VOTE] Removal of the LE distribution To clarify - my main concern is the second part of 'write once, run everywhere'. Right now JDK1.4 is just not 'everywhere', and I don't think any cool feature would justify sacrificing this. At this moment the 'everywhere' is defined ( at least IMO ) by the free VMs ( kaffe, GCJ, etc ) - just look at the list of supported platforms and OSes. So I'll be -1 on requiring JDK1.4 for container and connector - if JSP2.0 requires 1.4, then we'll have to require it too for the distribution, but it should still be possible to remove jsp and run java web applications based on less requiring technologies. I'm all for using JDK1.4 features like NIO or prefs - but that should be done in a modular way that allows the system to work for most users and platforms. I periodically test the compilation using GCJ - and so far we are ok ( except jasper, which can't be compiled - at least last time I tried - due to inner classes and bugs in gcj ). For example - is JDK1.4 available for BSD or Sparc/Linux or Arm/Linux ? I think BSD and linux are fine operating systems and Tomcat should run on them. Costin Remy Maucherat wrote: > Costin Manolache wrote: >> Remy Maucherat wrote: >> >> >>>Hi all, >>> >>>Before starting to release 5.0.x milestones, I would like to propose >>>having only one distribution for Tomcat 5.0.x, and standardize on >>>what the LE distribution contains (so well, it's more the other >>>distribution which gets removed). >>> >>>It has some advantages: >>>- it is slightly smaller (less these days now that the XML parser has >>>to be shipped again with Tomcat) >>>- runs as-is on JDK 1.3 (because of the Xerces inclusion) >>>- 99% Apache or Apache-style licence (the JDBC 2 standard extension >>>is needed for JDK 1.3 DataSource support :-() >>>- less user confusion >>> >>>The main "problem" is that the user will need additional downloads >>>for some of the more advanced features, and the package will also not >>>run on JDK 1.2 as is (but from what I've seen, JDK 1.2 compatibility >>>may not be a priority for developers). >>> >>><ballot> >>>+1 [X] Yes, remove the LE distribution >>>-1 [ ] No, keep both distributions >>></ballot> >> >> >> What would it take to be 100% Apache-style licence ? Can we do some >> introspection tricks or conditional compilation to solve this ? > > I can remove the JDBC SE JAR, but then the JDBC connection pooling > features won't work right out of the box on JDK 1.3 (assuming it is > possible to run JDK 1.3 with TC 5). > > A great blinking warning should be added to the download page and the > release notes if we do that. > > If somehow the Catalina (with JSP 2 support) adapter requires JDK 1.4, > then JDBC SE can be removed. > > Remy -- Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
