EL and JSP 2.1

[Jacob Hookom <ja...@hookom.net>]

I'd like to get the ball rolling on a branch for JSP 2.1.  I also have a 
new EL implementation that I would like to roll in as a replacement to 
the Commons-EL implementation.  There's also the API modifications for 
JSP and the EL-API.

Along the lines of project/folder naming and code placement-- are there 
'rules' the group is expecting?  Also, would you like to keep the EL 
separate and instead guide EL implementation into Commons-EL?

If anyone has any clarifications, questions, or recommendations, just 
let me know--

-- 
Jacob Hookom  -  Minneapolis
----------------------------
JSF-EG, JSF-RI, EL, Facelets


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

Re: EL and JSP 2.1

[Ian Darwin <ia...@darwinsys.com>]

>>> - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?
>>
>>
>> No for the api stuff proper. We don't host it, can't change it and our
>> own implementation would be more trouble than it is worth.
>>
>> Maybe for the examples. It is useful to be able to fix problems with
>> them. The examples could always be merged in with the container module.
>
>
> I think we should have an implementation of the new API.
>
Does it need to be maintained as its own tree with its own JavaDoc? Or,
if it is "only" something to compile against, could we just extract it from
the compiled classes, using reflection? 

Ian

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

Re: EL and JSP 2.1

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

Mark Thomas wrote:
>>The key questions are:
>> - does 6.0.x become the main development branch?
> 
> Yes. We did this for 5.5.x and it worked.

Ok.

>> - do we merge jasper and container?
> 
> No. Good to keep them independent.

Ok.

>> - do we merge build and container
> 
> Maybe. If someone wants to take the time to do this and update the
> build scripts great. Personally, not an itch I feel the need to scratch.

The JSP implementation is independent, so there's no change here.

>> - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?
> 
> No for the api stuff proper. We don't host it, can't change it and our
> own implementation would be more trouble than it is worth.
> 
> Maybe for the examples. It is useful to be able to fix problems with
> them. The examples could always be merged in with the container module.

I think we should have an implementation of the new API.

Rémy

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

Re: EL and JSP 2.1

[Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>]

Hi,
I'm actually +1 to more or less everything Costin said ;)
Yoav

On 1/6/06, Costin Manolache <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/27/05, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > My own views in line.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > Jacob Hookom wrote:
> > >
> > >>I'd like to get the ball rolling on a branch for JSP 2.1.
> > >
> > > I can get the SVN stuff set up over the next few days. There has been
> > > some debate about how we arrange things so we need to get agreement on
> > > the way forward.
> > >
> > > The key questions are:
> > >  - does 6.0.x become the main development branch?
> > Yes. We did this for 5.5.x and it worked.
>
> Yes, you'll need to create a branch for 5.5.
>
>
> >
> > >  - do we merge jasper and container?
> > No. Good to keep them independent.
>
> The independence is not given by the fact they are in different trees - the
> connector and container are not independent, yet in different trees.
>
> And the 'separation' of jasper and container can be achieved as well
> by continuing to use
> differet packages :-).
>
>
> > >  - do we merge build and container
> > Maybe. If someone wants to take the time to do this and update the
> > build scripts great. Personally, not an itch I feel the need to scratch.
>
> Probably doesn't make sense if this is the only change.
>
> It seems people are not ok with a single source tree.
>
>
> >
> > >  - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?
> > No for the api stuff proper. We don't host it, can't change it and our
> > own implementation would be more trouble than it is worth.
> >
> > Maybe for the examples. It is useful to be able to fix problems with
> > them. The examples could always be merged in with the container module.
>
>
> IMO - 6.0 would be the best chance to reorg the tree structure. Given
> that JDK1.5 will be required, it means we could remove all <1.4 code
> and hacks, and a lot of the build hacks that are used to deal with
> multiple VMs and options.
>
> I think we should just create a tomcat6/ repository, and then take a
> snapshot of all subtrees
> in the current tomcat and place the all in the same tree, under
> tomcat6/java. Then start with a fresh build.xml - excluding or
> removing the 1.1 - 1.4 support classes.
>
> Well - I would go even further, on creating a smaller number of jars
> for the distribution, but I guess that would be even less popular than
> the singe tree.
>
> I do understand I'm in a very small minority with this proposal, just
> want to have it on the record  :-)
>
> Costin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>


--
Yoav Shapira
System Design and Management Fellow
MIT Sloan School of Management
Cambridge, MA, USA
yoavs@computer.org / www.yoavshapira.com

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

Re: EL and JSP 2.1

[Costin Manolache <co...@gmail.com>]

On 12/27/05, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> My own views in line.
>
> Mark
>
> Mark Thomas wrote:
> > Jacob Hookom wrote:
> >
> >>I'd like to get the ball rolling on a branch for JSP 2.1.
> >
> > I can get the SVN stuff set up over the next few days. There has been
> > some debate about how we arrange things so we need to get agreement on
> > the way forward.
> >
> > The key questions are:
> >  - does 6.0.x become the main development branch?
> Yes. We did this for 5.5.x and it worked.

Yes, you'll need to create a branch for 5.5.


>
> >  - do we merge jasper and container?
> No. Good to keep them independent.

The independence is not given by the fact they are in different trees - the
connector and container are not independent, yet in different trees.

And the 'separation' of jasper and container can be achieved as well
by continuing to use
differet packages :-).


> >  - do we merge build and container
> Maybe. If someone wants to take the time to do this and update the
> build scripts great. Personally, not an itch I feel the need to scratch.

Probably doesn't make sense if this is the only change.

It seems people are not ok with a single source tree.


>
> >  - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?
> No for the api stuff proper. We don't host it, can't change it and our
> own implementation would be more trouble than it is worth.
>
> Maybe for the examples. It is useful to be able to fix problems with
> them. The examples could always be merged in with the container module.


IMO - 6.0 would be the best chance to reorg the tree structure. Given
that JDK1.5 will be required, it means we could remove all <1.4 code
and hacks, and a lot of the build hacks that are used to deal with
multiple VMs and options.

I think we should just create a tomcat6/ repository, and then take a
snapshot of all subtrees
in the current tomcat and place the all in the same tree, under
tomcat6/java. Then start with a fresh build.xml - excluding or
removing the 1.1 - 1.4 support classes.

Well - I would go even further, on creating a smaller number of jars
for the distribution, but I guess that would be even less popular than
the singe tree.

I do understand I'm in a very small minority with this proposal, just
want to have it on the record  :-)

Costin

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

Re: EL and JSP 2.1

[Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>]

My own views in line.

Mark

Mark Thomas wrote:
> Jacob Hookom wrote:
> 
>>I'd like to get the ball rolling on a branch for JSP 2.1.
> 
> I can get the SVN stuff set up over the next few days. There has been
> some debate about how we arrange things so we need to get agreement on
> the way forward.
> 
> The key questions are:
>  - does 6.0.x become the main development branch?
Yes. We did this for 5.5.x and it worked.

>  - do we merge jasper and container?
No. Good to keep them independent.

>  - do we merge build and container
Maybe. If someone wants to take the time to do this and update the
build scripts great. Personally, not an itch I feel the need to scratch.

>  - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?
No for the api stuff proper. We don't host it, can't change it and our
own implementation would be more trouble than it is worth.

Maybe for the examples. It is useful to be able to fix problems with
them. The examples could always be merged in with the container module.


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

Re: EL and JSP 2.1

[Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>]

Jacob Hookom wrote:
> I'd like to get the ball rolling on a branch for JSP 2.1.  I also have a
> new EL implementation that I would like to roll in as a replacement to
> the Commons-EL implementation.  There's also the API modifications for
> JSP and the EL-API.
> 
> Along the lines of project/folder naming and code placement-- are there
> 'rules' the group is expecting?  Also, would you like to keep the EL
> separate and instead guide EL implementation into Commons-EL?
> 
> If anyone has any clarifications, questions, or recommendations, just
> let me know--
> 

I can get the SVN stuff set up over the next few days. There has been
some debate about how we arrange things so we need to get agreement on
the way forward.

The key questions are:
 - does 6.0.x become the main development branch?
 - do we merge jasper and container?
 - do we merge build and container
 - do we maintain servletapi for 6.0?

I am assuming we use the latest connectors for all versions as currently.

Mark


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