On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Anthony W. Marino wrote: > You mentioned something about a "tar" problem. Does the cvs snapshot "tar" > work?
'tar' is not the problem :-), but the snapshot that is included with 4.0.2/4.0.3. The nightly is fine, and 4.0.4/3.3.2 will include the right snapshot ( I hope ). Costin > > Thanks again, > Anthony > > > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Anthony W. Marino wrote: > > > Costin, > > > > > > Thank you very much for this claification!!! > > > Could you, or someone, advise/point to document on where "jk2" is with > > > regards to function completion? > > > > Most of the essential features ( Ajp over TCP, with manual configuration ) > > are done. > > > > The refactoring ( object model, general data structures, config model ) > > are done. > > > > Apache2 and 1.3 are done, IIS is close. > > > > The only important thing that remains to be done is closing up on the > > new configuration format ( including webapps/, etc ) - I sent 2 proposals > > today on tomcat-dev. > > > > Besides that, jk2 will have some 'experimental' features ( we > > can't call them 'relase quality' without a large amount of testing, > > and I don't consider them essential ): > > > > - the 'unix socket' channel is working fine ( for Unix, of course ). > > - the 'JNI' channel should work in multi-threaded, single process mode, > > and will work in multi-process,multi-threaded after shm is complted > > - the 'shm' will allow dynamic add/removal of tomcat instances. The > > hard part is ( I hope ) done, but the final details for the format > > of the scoreboad are taking longer ( I'm trying to reuse that for > > a future shm channel and to cover a future 'dynamic add/remove or > > webapps') > > > > Another important change that is still in progress is an optimization > > of the mapper, plus better vhost and WEB-INF detection ( needed > > in IIS ). > > > > Any help we get will move jk2 closer and make it better. > > > > Costin > > > > > Thanks, > > > Anthony > > > > > > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Anthony W. Marino wrote: > > > > > I'm confused with the state of the connectors available for > > > > > Apache2/Tomcat integration. Could someone, please, shed some light > > > > > on this. The following is some of what I've read/interpreted from > > > > > messages on this list: > > > > > > > > > > mod_jk: Unstable > > > > > mod_jk2: Bleeding edge for development purposes only > > > > > mod_webapp: Next generation integration module for Apache/Tomcat that > > > > > will eventually replace mod_jk's. However, performance hit since > > > > > even static pages will have to go through Tomcat before being served > > > > > by Apache. > > > > > > > > mod_jk is stable and works fine with apache2 and all tomcats. > > > > There is a bug in the tar.gz, but the CVS head is tested and works > > > > great. We'll update the tars on the first release of tomcat. > > > > > > > > mod_jk2 is getting close to feature-complete, but you should stick with > > > > mod_jk for production until ready. > > > > > > > > mod_webapp is _not_ the "next generation" nor "replaces" mod_jk. > > > > It's just another connector, wrote by a different person in a different > > > > way. It's author doesn't like mod_jk, and people working on jk don't > > > > like webapp - you can choose whatever _you_ like. > > > > > > > > Costin > > -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
