Re: ***SPAM*** maxPostSize syntax

[Olivier Lefevre <le...@yahoo.com>]

You guys have a chip on your shoulder. This is Java.
"<x>M", "<x>m", "<x>G" and "<x>g" are accepted as
sizes by all the -Xm? options, so why not by Tomcat.
M and G are size units, too.

Other than dudes with an attitude like you, nobody
refers to 64M as 67108864.

-- O.L.


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

Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** maxPostSize syntax

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

On 06/06/2011 15:09, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> David,
> 
> On 6/2/2011 8:12 AM, David kerber wrote:
>> I would think overriding Integer.parseInt(), or adding an equivalent
>> method to the code section that loads the various configuration files
>> would be the most efficient way to do this globally.
> 
> Of course, overriding Integer.parseInt isn't a Good Idea, but using some
> other integer-parsing routine everywhere in Tomcat might not be a bad
> idea, especially for things where specifying magnitude using things like
> "M", "G", etc. seems reasonable.
> 
>> I'd love to have this abbreviation capability, but I can barely keep up
>> with my own company's code-writing needs, so I just use a calculator and
>> enter the actual integer value where it's needed.
> 
> Log it in BZ. In this case, it should be nearly trivial. Extending it to
> other places would be trivial in each case, but identifying those cases
> is labor-intensive.
> 
> If you review the documentation and just mention every setting in the
> enhancement request, it'll be much easier to implement.

The pace to implement this for folks wanting to look at writing a patch
is likely to be in either the digester parsing code or in
IntrospectionUtils. (he says without looking at the codebase at all)

Mark



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

Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** maxPostSize syntax

[Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David,

On 6/2/2011 8:12 AM, David kerber wrote:
> I would think overriding Integer.parseInt(), or adding an equivalent
> method to the code section that loads the various configuration files
> would be the most efficient way to do this globally.

Of course, overriding Integer.parseInt isn't a Good Idea, but using some
other integer-parsing routine everywhere in Tomcat might not be a bad
idea, especially for things where specifying magnitude using things like
"M", "G", etc. seems reasonable.

> I'd love to have this abbreviation capability, but I can barely keep up
> with my own company's code-writing needs, so I just use a calculator and
> enter the actual integer value where it's needed.

Log it in BZ. In this case, it should be nearly trivial. Extending it to
other places would be trivial in each case, but identifying those cases
is labor-intensive.

If you review the documentation and just mention every setting in the
enhancement request, it'll be much easier to implement.

- -chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk3s344ACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PDSugCfcpI6g0hffIpvXfu0BO30VXFe
SsYAn1iXnsgGxz5MLBxBrpfc6G7vD0SV
=/ypz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** maxPostSize syntax

[David kerber <dc...@verizon.net>]

On 6/2/2011 7:52 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 02/06/2011 02:37, Olivier Lefevre wrote:
>> You guys have a chip on your shoulder. This is Java.
>> "<x>M", "<x>m", "<x>G" and "<x>g" are accepted as
>> sizes by all the -Xm? options, so why not by Tomcat.
>> M and G are size units, too.
>>
>> Other than dudes with an attitude like you, nobody
>> refers to 64M as 67108864.
>
> When trying to persuade others to your point of view or to volunteer
> some of their time to implement a feature you would like to see, taking
> an antagonistic approach is rarely the most effective way to achieve
> your objective.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, you are the first person to suggest such a
> feature. That doesn't mean that such a feature would be unwelcome. It
> strikes me as a useful addition; if it can be implemented without having
> to change the setter for every attribute that could use these abbreviations.

I would think overriding Integer.parseInt(), or adding an equivalent 
method to the code section that loads the various configuration files 
would be the most efficient way to do this globally.

I'd love to have this abbreviation capability, but I can barely keep up 
with my own company's code-writing needs, so I just use a calculator and 
enter the actual integer value where it's needed.

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

Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** maxPostSize syntax

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

On 02/06/2011 02:37, Olivier Lefevre wrote:
> You guys have a chip on your shoulder. This is Java.
> "<x>M", "<x>m", "<x>G" and "<x>g" are accepted as
> sizes by all the -Xm? options, so why not by Tomcat.
> M and G are size units, too.
> 
> Other than dudes with an attitude like you, nobody
> refers to 64M as 67108864.

When trying to persuade others to your point of view or to volunteer
some of their time to implement a feature you would like to see, taking
an antagonistic approach is rarely the most effective way to achieve
your objective.

To the best of my knowledge, you are the first person to suggest such a
feature. That doesn't mean that such a feature would be unwelcome. It
strikes me as a useful addition; if it can be implemented without having
to change the setter for every attribute that could use these abbreviations.

Tomcat is developed by the community. That means everyone - including
you - has a role to play. If there is a feature you would like to see,
you can open an enhancement request. Enhancement requests with patches
tend to find their way into the code base faster than enhancement
requests without patches. If you need some pointers on writing a patch
for this, you can ask here.

Mark



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

Re: maxPostSize syntax

[André Warnier <aw...@ice-sa.com>]

Olivier Lefevre wrote:
> You guys have a chip on your shoulder. This is Java.
> "<x>M", "<x>m", "<x>G" and "<x>g" are accepted as
> sizes by all the -Xm? options, so why not by Tomcat.
> M and G are size units, too.
> 
> Other than dudes with an attitude like you, nobody
> refers to 64M as 67108864.
> 
Olivier,
this doesn't help.

You idea about the M and G (and K) suffixes is not fundamentally a bad one, and requested
nicely as an enhancement it may have stood some chance of being added in a future version
of Tomcat. But if I was one of the Tomcat developers, even one with a very small attitude,
  after the above post I would now just put it on the list for Tomcat 15.0.

The normal answer to a post like the one above would be to ignore it, and to further
ignore any future posts by the same author.
Let me explain why :
First there is this : http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Then,
- the "dudes" which develop Tomcat do this for free, on their own time.
- many of these same dudes also spend time watching this list and trying to help other
people in resolving Tomcat issues, also for free.
- there exist good software developers with an attitude; there are also many without an
attitude.
- there are also many other people who have never contributed useful software to the
community, but seem perfectly content to use the results of the work of the former for
free, and just contribute critics and sarcasm.  I believe these people are commonly
referred to as "leaches". One may also say they have an attitude.
- I am neither a good software developer nor one of the Tomcat developers, and have never
contributed any code to Tomcat; I just use it. But I have personally met several of the
Tomcat developers. They are nice people, and I cannot remember any one of them having "an
attitude".

In summary : you are using for free a very good software package which others have
developed. It does not have a minor feature which you would find nice. You ask about it,
get a couple of answers which you don't like, and your response is to become abusive.

I believe that the best course now would be to apologise, and re-phrase your request
politely and constructively.
And if also by chance you happened to be a Java developer and willing to contribute your
skills, the Tomcat source code is available, also for free, and the Tomcat developers
would probably be very receptive to a proposal from you for implementing your suggestion,
in the form of a patch.
They may even then forget your last post.






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