that was what i was thinking too. people are spending gobs of cash on instrumentation, is it unreasonable to ask users to pick up a secondhand post OSX mac from ebay or steal one from the office down the hall?
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:14 PM, LAW Andy <[email protected]> wrote: > Are we talking about *developers* or *users* here? > > > If we're talking about users, then could we not generate alternate > versions of the maven artifacts/final jars by using profiles and the > compiler plugin target designation. > > Only if we're talking about *developers* does the source code Annotation > issue arise. How many active biojava developers are there that are running > on a PPC OSX system? > > > Or have I misunderstood? > > > On 11 May 2012, at 05:00, Steve Darnell wrote: > > > Hi Andreas, > > > > In the end, we all have to make decisions that best support our users. > Owning an old Mac is a tough proposition (especially a PPC in an Intel > world) since the Mac culture favors OS and hardware upgrades every 2-3 > years. It's easy to be left in the dust. > > > > ~Steve > > > > Sent from my HTC Merge > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andreas Prlic [[email protected]] > > Received: Thursday, 10 May 2012, 7:08pm > > To: Steve Darnell [[email protected]] > > CC: Biojava [[email protected]] > > Subject: Re: [Biojava-l] biojava and Java version > > > > Hi Steve, > > > > I agree with looking forward and I usually give the EOL argument to > > Java 1.5 users as well and try to convince them to upgrade, too. In > > the end Apple is to blame for putting this customer in a difficult > > situation and not having the choice of an upgrade. > > > > I am bringing this up since at the RCSB PDB we are using BioJava in a > > couple of Java webstart applications and as such we are confronted > > with a diverse user group. 80% of the users are on Java 1.6, but the > > rest is using a variety of newer and older versions. > > > > Since we can't control the Java version at the user end I would prefer > > to stay a bit backwards compatible as long as it does not cause pain > > and move along with the bulk of users. Removing @Override annotations > > seems like an easy enough compromise for supporting 1.5 and making the > > few people happy, who are still stuck with legacy hardware. > > > > Andreas > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Steve Darnell <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Greetings, > >> > >> I agree with the original BioJava3 design principles ( > http://biojava.org/wiki/BioJava3_Design), the first of which is "BioJava3 > (BJ3) will freely incorporate features from Java 6." > >> > >> Java 5 has been EOL'd since October 2009 and Java 6 EOL is scheduled > for November 2012 (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html). > Apple stopped using PowerPC processors in 2006 and has not updated OS X > 10.5 in almost a year (June 2011). > >> > >> I suggest planning for the future rather than clinging to the past. > There is a positive buzz with my coworkers about switching to Java 7. The > language changes alone are a very welcomed improvement: > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/jdk7-relnotes-418459.html > >> > >> * Binary Literals > >> * Strings in switch Statements > >> * The try-with-resources Statement > >> * Catching Multiple Exception Types and Rethrowing Exceptions with > Improved Type Checking > >> * Underscores in Numeric Literals > >> * Type Inference for Generic Instance Creation > >> * Improved Compiler Warnings and Errors When Using Non-Reifiable Formal > Parameters with Varargs Methods > >> > >> I do sympathize for those who cannot upgrade from OS X 10.5 and PPC. > Perhaps the SoyLatte OpenJDK 7 build for PPC may provide an acceptable > solution for running BioJava3 on Leopard PPC? > http://landonf.bikemonkey.org/static/soylatte/bsd-dist/openjdk7_darwin/openjdk7-macppc-2009-12-16-b4.tar.bz2 > . > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Steve > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Andreas Prlic > >> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 4:51 PM > >> To: Biojava > >> Subject: [Biojava-l] biojava and Java version > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> After some discussions with a user I was reminded of the issue that > there are some PowerPC based OSX systems that are locked into > >> OSX10.5.8 . They can't upgrade their OS and they can't upgrade to Java > >> 1.6 because none of these are available for PowerPCs. While that is not > our fault, the question is if we should try to make BioJava backwards > compatible towards 1.5. > >> > >> Anybody out there on such a system? > >> > >> Any opinions on making BioJava java 1.5 backwards compatible again? > >> Essentially it means a global replace all "@Override" with "" > >> > >> Andreas > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Biojava-l mailing list - [email protected] > http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Biojava-l mailing list - [email protected] > > http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l > > Later, > > Andy > -------- > Yada, yada, yada... > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, > with registration number SC005336 > Disclaimer: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended > solely for the use of the recipient(s) to whom they are addressed. If you > have received it in error, please destroy all copies and inform the sender. > > > > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > > _______________________________________________ > Biojava-l mailing list - [email protected] > http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l > -- Simon Rayner State Key Laboratory of Virology Wuhan Institute of Virology Chinese Academy of Sciences Wuhan, Hubei 430071 P.R.China +86 (27) 87199895 (office) +86 18627113001 (cell) _______________________________________________ Biojava-l mailing list - [email protected] http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l
