Agreed it would be a Bad Thing to have Tuscany not work with J2SE5 so maybe saying J2SE6 be the "default" for 2.0 wasn't quite right. The benefits of reduced dependencies and footprint mainly relate to how we distribute and embed Tuscany 2.0 and we're not quite at that stage yet so perhaps we should put this on the back burning for now. If we keep J2SE5 as the default for the build we'll ensure J2SE5 compatibility and we can look at some sort of smaller light weight distributions for J2SE6 when we get a bit further on in the 2.0 bringup.
...ant On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > What are the implications to users that have Tuscany embedded in their > solution, or just regular users that have Tuscany applications > deployed to not latest releases of Tomcat or other application server > still based on J2SE 5 ? > > Also, this question should also be raised on the urser list, to get users > input. > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Mike Edwards > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Folks, > > > > +1 to moving up to J2SE 6.0 for 2.0. > > > > I've been using 6.0 for a while now for all my work and it goes pretty > well. > > > > One additional comment to make is that I think we need to specify some > > minimum point level of 6 since early versions have problems with things > that > > we care about like JAXB. > > > > I'm on Sun 1.6.0_07 at the moment, but I think the break point is > 1.6.0_05 > > for Sun (I don't know about IBM and other versions of J2SE 6.0) > > > > > > Yours, Mike. > > > > ant elder wrote: > >> > >> Any opinions on having Java SE 6 be the default for the Tuscany 2.0 > >> stream? > >> > >> A benefit of doing this is that a lot of the basic dependencies we use > are > >> included in Java SE 6 by default so we wouldn't need to include all > those > >> dependencies separately so we'd look much smaller and lightweight. > Tuscany > >> 2.0 would still work with Java SE 5 you'd just need to include the extra > >> dependencies manually which we'd need to document how to do. So its > weighing > >> up if the extra burden and complexity for those Java SE 5 users is out > >> weighed by the smallness for the Java SE 6 users. I think it could be > worth > >> doing. > >> > >> FYI, Geronimo is having a similar discussion - > >> http://apache.markmail.org/message/fskiwsxsb7vfbpnk. One comment there > is > >> that "J2SE 5.0 is in its Java Technology End of Life (EOL) transition > >> period. The EOL transition period began April 8th, 2008 and will > complete > >> October 30th, 2009, when J2SE 5.0 will have reached its End of Service > Life > >> (EOSL)" > >> > >> ...ant > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Luciano Resende > Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk > http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >
