Ben, I made the comments I did largely because of the attitude shown in the initial responses I received upon reporting the bug. Responses such as the following made me beleive no-one on the -dev list actually cared about fixing the problem;
- "This is always because your code or libraries used by it start and don't terminate non-daemon threads" (and then closing the bug as invalid) - which is incorrect as I've now prooved. - "Well, I just tested it, and wasted my time ;)" (and then closing the bug as invalid) - after testing on completely the wrong platform. - "two people (myself being the second) have confirmed that this issue is not reproducible" - again incorrect, as you mentioned at least one other person reproduced the issue and I have reproduced on two seperate machines. - "don't write statements like "which seems to show there are a lot of threads waiting on an object". This doesn't make any sense, and makes the credibility of the report go down." - The original statement is perfectly valid, has been used by many people in many discussions, and originates from Suns own documentation and guidelines. - "I just tested with Ubuntu Hoary and Sun JRE 1.5.0_01. Both startup.sh and shutdown.sh work as expected, and Tomcat runs great." - Wrong platform and JDK again. It wasn't until you became involved that there appeared to be any sign of anyone taking this issue seriously. As I hope you can understand I was becomming increasingly frustrated and therefore focused on trying to show how it could be reproduced rather than providing fuel for what seemed to be the prevalent attitude of "Doesn't work on my box, not interested". I have since made a post with what I beleive to be potential fixes to resolve the problem. Regards, Al. Ben Souther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 03.02.2005, 13:14:13: > Al, > I read it thoroughly. Remy Maucharat didn't mention the platform he had > tested on until the 7th post and by then Yoav Shapira had already stated > that he tested it as well (with no mention of the platform). They also > agreed that the case would be re-opened if you could help them to > reproduce the problem. > > My criticism is that you mentioned a developer from the users list who > also claimed to have problems shutting down Tocmat which would seem to > bolster your case -- except that he never mentioned whether or not he > was starting his own threads in his application. You did not, however, > mention that I tested on the exact same distribution that you're having > problems on with a fresh download of TC and it ran fine. > > If you're serious about getting to the root of the problem, which I > think you are, it's important that all facts are on the table -- even > the ones that don't support your argument. > > -Ben > > > > On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 01:43, Al Sutton wrote: > > Ben, > > > > Please re-read my email. It is discussing the initial response I received > > from the -dev list, and then addressing the issue raised about it being > > distribution specific. > > > > My critisism was that the bug was initially closed when the only attempt to > > re-produce it I was made aware of was made on a completely different > > platform and that it initially appeared that the -dev list did not have > > developers that were willing to investigate the problem. > > > > Regards, > > > > Al. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ben Souther [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 02 February 2005 22:25 > > To: Tomcat Developers List > > Subject: RE: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33339] - Shutdown script down not work > > > > > > On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 16:54, Al Sutton wrote: > > > In answer to your points; > > > > > > on 3) I'm not asking for it tested on all distros, just those where issues > > > have arisen. If no-one has FC2 installed then thats something the group > > > should know about and should be able to say "Sorry, no-one has FC2", > > rather > > > than "Closed bug, doesn't work on [insert name of totally different > > platform > > > here]". > > > > > > The users mail list has a report from Drew Jorgenson if it not working on > > > RHAS 3, and I can confirm I've also seen the behaviour on SLES8 (i.e. a > > > non-redhat product), so I don't think it's distribution specific. > > > > Just for the record, I tested on FC2 and posted the shell session on the > > users list. You responded to my email before writing this message. > > I've also stated that I'm willing to upgrade both the kernel and the JDK > > to test under an environment that is closer to yours. > > > > Please don't omit these details when when writing to either list. At the > > very least, it's dishonest, at worst it's misleading and could cause > > people to waste time repeating things that have already been done. > > > > -Ben > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
