On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 00:18 -0700, Brian Stansberry wrote: > --- Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:02 -0700, Brian Stansberry
<snip> > > > 3) Did a little archeology and it looks like JCL > > 1.0.1 > > > was cut about a week before the AccessController > > stuff > > > was added. So that's the last release that ran on > > JDK > > > 1.1. > > > > Yep, that's how I read the CVS/SVN logs too. Version > > 1.0.2 was JDK1.2 > > only. > > > > There's no information I can find on whether the > > change to drop JDK 1.1 > > was deliberate or not.. > > For odd reasons (see below) I was reading Bugzilla > 10825, and in the bug's discussion thread there are > comments made just a few weeks before the > AccessController stuff was added that JDK 1.1.8 > compatibility was important. the loss of support was accidental: i would definitely have -1'd the release (which would have sunk it) had i know about the loss of java 1.1 support. (at the very least, the numbering rules mean that it should have to have been released as JCL 1.1 or JCL 2 rather than 1.0.2.) - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
