Hi,

I see no reason to create a new branch, which is not what happened with previous releases, where branches were created sometimes even before the stable release (4.1.x got forked for 4.0 final, and 5.0.x was forked for 4.1.7). Reasons for no branching:
- Tomcat is rather modular
- Behavior in nearly all cases seems well established, so no major breakage is to be expected
- Increased maintenance requirements due to diverting resource (we did have a problem with that, looking at all the BZ items)
- Branching hasn't really been synonymous with stability or quality in the past, given patch porting decisions have been questionable sometimes (that's likely my fault, as the RM)


We now have a stable 5.0.16, which so far seems like a quality release. Since 5.0.x is only an evolution of 4.1.x, I don't see much needs for more than one additional 4.1.x releases (assuming it's a good one without regressions :D ). If people want more, a new RM will need to pop up :) (BTW, I can pass the hot potato right now for 4.x if someone is interested :D )

I'm interested in the following enhancements to 5.0.x in the future (= in january or later):
- refactoring of the save to XML feature (that's been requested; I don't know if I'll use that to be able to use the admin webapp under JBoss, though); likely the default impl will remain the current one, but we'll be able to take out all that code from StandardServer :)
- full support for a JMX-ized server.xml, which is used in the embedded distribution (I think a few components can't be created using that; I could be wrong though, Costin did a great job)
- I'll add the minimal server.xml to embedded and some startup scripts and the native wrappers, and I'll "optimize" it some more, so that it can also be used as a minimal Tomcat installation (without any CL hierarchy, which sometimes confuses beginners)
- tweaks and fixes


Rémy



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to