Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Tim Funk wrote:
I thought changes were going into trunk and then when applicable,
backported to 6.0.x.
While I initiated the creation of the trunk branch, I can no longer
work with Filip since I disagree with him on API design, and I don't
like his ideas on collaboration. As a result, I do not wish to
participate in trunk development, and I have to do my development
activities elsewhere :(
it's community development, you can participate or not. That's your call.
You've threatened to start other branches elsewhere, you've threatened
to leave, you can keep threatening, if the community is strong enough it
will survive. If it is not, then it will fall, just like Rome did.
No, trunk is Filip's development, and that's it. I've been working
elsewhere since I had no other choice, and I regret there is no way to
collaborate. ASF projects cannot go anywhere if two parties are in
constant opposition, so basically one of us needs to go away for the
project to move forward.
I now think removing the trunk branch or moving it to the sandbox
would be best.
I'm gonna propose for trunk to stay, we specifically made that cause you
decided changes the Geronimo team needed were not appropriate.
And there are other changes that have gone in there since then.
Maybe switching to a tigher patch inclusion process like what is done in
httpd, and reboot trunk, could be a solution. As you may have noticed, I
disagreed with all your Comet related commits, and you never cared in
any way. This would have avoided the initial divide.
Unless I missed something, the patch which Geronimo needs is API
incompatible with Tomcat 6.0.x, and external projects are already using
the said API for integration with Tomcat, so I don't see a way to do it.
Let me know if I missed something.
Since this change is only writing warning messages. It seems
appropriate that it can remain in 6.0.x.
Yes, it should only display warnings, but if we display bad warnings
in a stable release, we'll get zillions of angry users.
right up your ally ;)
Huh ?
So it's important to get it right. I committed this in the 6.0.x
branch since I don't have any other sensible place to commit it.
it not backwards compatible, that's why 6.0 would be inappropriate for
such a change
Feel free to veto the patch and then revert it if you think it's
inappropriate.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
