On 17 June 2012 03:40, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Jun 16, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
For now, I want @override so I am ok with 1.6 source but I is safe to
the have 1.5 target? Commons-io =2.3 is not pressing for VFS.
Gary
Why would it not be? If that is
.
/Andreas
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VFS-Update-VFS-trunk-to-Java-6-tp4629464p4635119.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e
On Jun 16, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
For now, I want @override so I am ok with 1.6 source but I is safe to
the have 1.5 target? Commons-io =2.3 is not pressing for VFS.
Gary
Why would it not be? If that is all you are doing the @Override doesn't make it
to the actual Class.
installations left, and jboss 4 doesn't
support jdk 6). I just wanted you to know that there still are VFS users
that depend on jdk 1.5 compatibility.
/Andreas
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VFS-Update-VFS-trunk-to-Java-6-tp4629464p4635119.html
Sent
2.1 (we have several jboss 4 installations left, and jboss 4 doesn't
support jdk 6). I just wanted you to know that there still are VFS users
that depend on jdk 1.5 compatibility.
/Andreas
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VFS-Update-VFS-trunk
that depend on jdk 1.5 compatibility.
/Andreas
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VFS-Update-VFS-trunk-to-Java-6-tp4629464p4635119.html
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com
installations left, and jboss 4 doesn't
support jdk 6). I just wanted you to know that there still are VFS users
that depend on jdk 1.5 compatibility.
/Andreas
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VFS-Update-VFS-trunk-to-Java-6-tp4629464p4635119.html
Sent
FYI: I've updated VFS trunk to Java 6 to avoid getting stuck on older
versions of jars and further moving VFS in the 21st century ;) Tasked
as VFS-415.
I was happy to see VFS-414 and VFS-313 being fixed, thank you very much for
that! The change in VFS-415 however makes it impossible for us to
Thanks. We to we're taken by surprise by this as it was not discussed prior to
the change. As a rule the minimum version should only be changed if something
requires it. I'm waiting for a response from Gary as to why this was necessary
before asking him to revert it.
Ralph
On May 14, 2012, at
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ralph Goers rgo...@apache.org wrote:
Thanks. We to we're taken by surprise by this as it was not discussed
prior to the change. A
This has been backed out of SVN for now.
(from the JIRA:)
Whys:
- Make VFS more attractive for new user/developers, new
10 matches
Mail list logo