BAD MSG: Ant 1.5.x, *and* there are very few 1.1 users since nobody ever complained bout 1.5.1/2's bytecode not being 1.1 compatible!
Leaving JDK 1.1 behind should also mean forking the 1.6 code from the 1.5 code. I don't see reasons to try to back-port fixes made on 1.6 to the 1.5. Only bugs identified by people running JDK 1.1 should make it to the 1.5 branch. This should be the only activity going on in that 1.5 branch. Given the above, there are no reasons to limit the 1.6 code base from *any* change that's JDK 1.2 (Java 2) compatible. That includes moving everything to the Java 2 Collections. As I said before, 1.5.x is a damn good release (once 1.5.3 is out), and should more than satisfy JDK 1.1 users (wherever they're hiding). The buck has to stop somewhere, and from the votes, it's clear 1.6 should depend on JDK 1.2. This should not prevent though JDK 1.2 to be fully used everywhere it's possible. Steve and Costin might as well -1 the move to JDK 1.2 with this kind of thinking. --DD -----Original Message----- From: Costin Manolache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 12:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [VOTE] JDK 1.1 support Steve Loughran wrote: > > +1 > > At the same time, I dont see a need to run into refactoring everything we > have today to move up to 1.2 support, 'just because we can'. It'll make it > that much harder to back port patches to the 1.5.x codebase +1 on your comment ( and a preemptive -1 on changing any public method that uses Hashtables to use Maps - "just because we can" :-). Using Maps in new code or tasks should be fine. Refactoring some of the introspection code - like support for context class loader or jdk1.2 methods - is worth it ( IMO ), as it'll make the code easier to understand. Costin
