Yoav Shapira wrote:
Filip, this is a fairly rare case where I disagree with you ;)
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
simply because it requires changes, I like to think we work according to
It can be done without requiring any changes
> This is just an alternative for those people who want to use a
> slightly easier / user-friendlier build system. We could do worse
> than lowering the barrier to entry for new contributors.
The idea is to :
- keep the current source layout
- keep the build.xml
- add some subdirs with pom.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The current build scripts are fully tested and work well. Adding
> additional methods of building or replacing these scripts altogether
> would only provide ways to create and/or release broken binaries.
Again, no one
On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 21:03 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> But like I said earlier, it's not worth disrupting the current Tomcat
> build or source layout. Only if it can be done without requiring any
> changes, which it can.
I will still vote against any inclusion of Maven usage in TC 6.0, 5.5
and
Filip, this is a fairly rare case where I disagree with you ;)
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> simply because it requires changes, I like to think we work according to
It can be done without requiring any changes.
> "if it aint broke, don't
Henri Gomez wrote:
-1 for any change to the build in Tomcat 6.0.
Why ?
simply because it requires changes, I like to think we work according to
"if it aint broke, don't fix it", and since the maven build doesn't give
us anything the ANT build already does, then there seems to be litt
Well, IMHO the servlet spec is going from bad to worse in terms of
complexity and feature bloat, so
careful what you wish :-)
My point was mostly that we don't have to implement OSGI HttpService, it may
be ok to use them for
modularization but for servlet-specific APIs we should stick with the JSR
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:09 +0200, Henri Gomez wrote:
> > Just a new thread to discuss about mavenizing Tomcat (OSGI Thread is
> > allready fully loaded and really interesting).
> >
> > Costin told us he didn't want to ch
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Henri Gomez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.
I agree with Coston on this. But thankfully Maven is flexible in this
area. You can define any set of source folders.
> - add subdirs (for modules)
> You should try to read the article I think :) This is about a specific
> issue, where there's no actual disagreement (basically it is a publicity
> stunt).
I read it carefully Remy, don't worry.
There is open discussion on Servlet 3.0 and may be the opportunity to
discuss more than just disc
On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:12 +0200, Henri Gomez wrote:
> Read on serverside that JSR-315 needs ideas for servlet 3.0 specs.
You should try to read the article I think :) This is about a specific
issue, where there's no actual disagreement (basically it is a publicity
stunt).
Rémy
--
> -1 for any change to the build in Tomcat 6.0.
Why ?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:09 +0200, Henri Gomez wrote:
> Just a new thread to discuss about mavenizing Tomcat (OSGI Thread is
> allready fully loaded and really interesting).
>
> Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.
>
> Alternative to mavenizing tomcat could be :
>
>
Read on serverside that JSR-315 needs ideas for servlet 3.0 specs.
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=49212
May be a good opportunity to send various requests about dynamic
reload purposes (with or without OSGI) to the JCR.
Regards
--
Just a new thread to discuss about mavenizing Tomcat (OSGI Thread is
allready fully loaded and really interesting).
Costin told us he didn't want to change the current source layout.
Alternative to mavenizing tomcat could be :
- add subdirs (for modules) and pom.xml and hack the source files
fil
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44904
Summary: Provide warning message when DataSource's maxActive="0"
Product: Tomcat 5
Version: 5.5.26
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Peter Kriens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Tomcat to really make a lot of sense. Providing OSGi headers seems to
> fulfill
> the immediate need of several groups. However, it would be really nice if
> you
> could provide a service interface like an Http Service (
Barak Yaish wrote:
Hello all,
I've started the attached post in users mailing list, which helped me to
track down the problem.
I'm reposting here now in order to understand the problem.
Please keep this thread to the users list where it belongs.
Mark
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44862
Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44862
Arokiaraj Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|enhancement |critical
Mark Thomas wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44494
--- Comment #52 from Rainer Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-04-28
11:53:54 PST ---
As soon as svn will be back to read/write, I'll add the patches to the
TC 5.5
STATUS file.
You should find
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43188
Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
22 matches
Mail list logo
