> -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org] > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 12:41 PM > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: Re: svn commit: r1345848 - in /tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk: ./ > java/org/apache/catalina/deploy/NamingResources.java > java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/AbstractEndpoint.java > > On 04/06/2012 17:05, Filip Hanik (mailing lists) wrote: > > > > Ok, this is back to code discipline. At some point, we'd have to > > expect that more users will adopt v7 in production (I'm still seeing > > 80%+ being on v6), at that point, commits like this do nothing except > > pollute the diffs. > > It depends which diffs you are looking at. If you are checking trunk > against 7.0.x to check that the back-port of a fix hasn't been missed > then having trunk and 7.0.x as closely aligned as possible is helpful. > If you are checking the changes in 7.0.x then formatting changes don't > help. It all depends on your point of view. I would also add that > consistently formatted code is easier to read and less likely to be > misread. [Filip Hanik] That's my point exactly. I believe we did a great job with stabilizing Apache Tomcat 6, and keeping it stable. I don't think we are doing as good of a job with Apache Tomcat 7. I think we can do better. So it's really what is the goal, if the goal to back port patches from trunk, then sure. Format both branches. That goal however has a flaw, it doesn't treat 7.0.x as a production grade branch, but a development branch.
> > > Servlet 3.1 has released a draft, where I'd expect that trunk is > > headed. There is no reason for v7 to continue to be an exact mirror > > of trunk, especially from a formatting point of view. > > That work hasn't started in Tomcat yet so at the moment there is no > driver for them to diverge. That will probably change over the next few > months. [Filip Hanik] Should change fairly shortly since the draft is out. > > > While this makes the code prettier, it makes it a lot harder to trace > > regressions. > > Not just prettier (see above) but I agree regarding regressions. > > > I'd suggest we start treating this as a stable branch, stable in my > > perception is that it's a branch that I use to support production > > environments, and that I can use to trace regressions and fixes. > > The obvious change would be to move 7.0.x to RTC rather than CTR. That > inevitably slows down the pace of development. We as a community need to > decide if that is what we want to do. If you want to propose that, I > suggest you start a new thread on that specific topic. [Filip Hanik] Doesn't have to be one extreme to another. All it takes a bit more discipline and an aligned goal with the 7.0.x branch. Filip --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
