Steve Loughran wrote: >> If this turns out to not work with JDK 1.1, it is another case for >> those of us proposing to leave JDK 1.1 support behind. This meant our >> binaries don't work with JDK 1.1 and nobody has complained so far 8-) >> > > It's a very good metric. Like how the memory settings for <java> are > broken on the MS JVM (which doesnt understand the -Xm command); its > been that way for ages but nobody cares.
Ok - last week we had a proposal, discussions on ant-user and ant-dev, and apparently an almost general consensus. What's next ? Should we wait a bit more before making it official by a [VOTE], or just forget the whole thing ? Costin
