Re: [FYI] Resin 3.0 - logging and JDK 1.4 dependency

Rob Lockstone wrote:
> On Monday, September 16, 2002, at 10:32 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>
>> Resin 3.0 is going to require JDK 1.4, I'm afraid. Since the
>> stable/production version, Resin 3.1, is planned for Q1 2003, that
>> shouldn't be too much of a problem for most users.
>
>
> Since it will be a while before 3.1 is available, are there plans for a
> 2.1.5 release?

Yes. I'm actually hoping for a 2.1.5 either by the end of the week or
the start of next week.

2.1.x will continue to be the stable version, so there will be 2.1.5,
2.1.6, etc.

> I'm still noticing the occasional "writing beyond the
> content-length" error message in 2.1.4. And I'm sure there are other
> little bugs that could be fixed.

There are plenty of bugs already known and almost certainly more that
will be reported that will be fixed in the 2.1.x branch.

>
> Please don't interpret this post as "how come you won't release 3.1
> sooner?". I'm firmly in the camp that software should not released until
> it's good and ready. I'd rather wait longer for a more stable release
> than get a buggy release sooner.

That's why we're doing a two-track release (like the Linux kernel).
3.0.x will be early, buggy, development releases (but still going though
the full regression/load testing before they're released, so they
shouldn't be too buggy). 2.1.x will remain stable.

> Personally, I don't mind if Resin 3+ is dependent on JDK 1.4. So far, my
> experience with 1.4 is much better than with previous JDK releases. JDK
> 1.4.1RC seems to have resolved the remaining memory management issues
> that I've seen with 1.4.0 (this is on Win2K). Although I still don't
> have it installed on any busy production machines. I'll wait for the
> final release of 1.4.1 before doing that.

That's one of the reasons I feel comfortable with the JDK 1.4
requirement. The JDK 1.3 releases were pretty unstable for the most part.

-- Scott

>
> Now, if only Apple could get their act together and get 1.4 out for OS
> X! They promised to get their releases more in sync with Sun's releases,
> but it just hasn't happened yet. :-(
>
> Rob
>
Received on Mon 16 Sep 2002 13:03:22 -0700