JK Todo v.2

[Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>]

Hi all,

Seems that everyone agrees to keep the Apache 1.3
support, and to keep jk as 'stable'. Fine...
Also, JNI (like in JK2) is totally out, that's fine too.

But, I'm not in favor to put the jk in the maintaining
mode altogether. We can keep the jk stable, but that
doesn't mean that the development has to be stopped.

So I propose more pragmatic approach:

1. Documentation
Think no one objects :).

2. Add unix sockets from jk2
3. Add thread pool for IIS from jk2
4. Add shared memory from jk2 (pre-apr)

All that will keep existing code intact regarding
stability.

Any objections?

MT.

Re: JK Todo v.2

[Remy Maucherat <re...@apache.org>]

Mladen Turk wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Seems that everyone agrees to keep the Apache 1.3
> support, and to keep jk as 'stable'. Fine...
> Also, JNI (like in JK2) is totally out, that's fine too.
>
> But, I'm not in favor to put the jk in the maintaining
> mode altogether. We can keep the jk stable, but that
> doesn't mean that the development has to be stopped.
>
> So I propose more pragmatic approach:
>
> 1. Documentation
> Think no one objects :).

It would be good to separate the mod_jk 1.2.x docs, so that people are 
less confused over what they should use.

Overall, I think the mod_jk 1.2 docs are decent right now. The thing 
which could be explained better is the usage of local workers (I saw 
many cases where people put local workers everywhere since it looked ok, 
and then didn't understand why load balancing wasn't working).

> 2. Add unix sockets from jk2
> 3. Add thread pool for IIS from jk2
> 4. Add shared memory from jk2 (pre-apr)
>
> All that will keep existing code intact regarding
> stability.

Rémy


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org