Costin Manolache wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
+1 if all new code goes in a separate module ( instead of catalina ),
and is built as separate .jar(s).
I wanted to, however I can't do that without changing the API some stuff
in the session package (the damn classes are all package private) :-P
I suppose it's a lot better to stop the hacks *now*, fix that, and put
everything in the cluster package.
Well, if you must - you must.
But we shouldn't have the core depend on the clustering, just add the
minimal stuff that you need in the session.
If we can stop the hacks and clean something - I think 5.0 is the best
chance.
I would preffer to have a consistent hook mechanism for everything -
I'm not sure what callbacks will be involved in the clustering.
Are you thinking about having coyote Action(s)? If yes, we might one to
extend the current API having in mind that we will need to supports
Clustering, Authentification, Authorization, etc.
It may be worth reopening the "minimal tomcat" discussion :-)
Maybe. If the difference is only a couple MBs, then it's not worth it,
though.
Bloat is not about MB or storage. It's about code complexity, potential
security, etc.
If we do an alternate distribution, it would have to be radically
different IMO (like for example, being a simple set of JARs without the
complex dir structure). The laucher + the catalina.properties + future
mods to the config system should make that easy.
That's what I was thinking about - a set of jars and minimal configuration.
Eventually using only MBeans for configuration and setup.
BTW, we could use MBeans for the optional packages too. I think it works
pretty well. We'll need to get a consensus on requiring JMX for tomcat5,
but so far it doesn't seem it'll have a big impact on the code ( I did
all kind of experiments with modeler and ant lately ).
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
