+1/-1 I am all for using jdk 1.5, but I guess it will take some time before I can use this jdk at work. Is it possible and easy to generate an 1.4 compatible binary version from 1.5 sources ? If so, I'd say go for it.
Just some additional thoughts (maybe they should be in another thread): - when considering package names, maybe it is an idea to work towards a plugin-alike structuring. It might be interesting if future development of some configuration format (INI,JNDI,etc) could be independent from, say, core components. - I think some prototype ui components (swing,jsp,etc.) might be a useful future addition, if only as a starting point for developing really useable ui components (and probably also as a teaser for new users), so you might want to consider that when considering package names as well. (of course, I am a user, not a developer :) On 12/13/07, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1. We need to come up with a standardized way of dealing with this > though I think. At first I didn't like changing package names, but it > does help avoid the "jar hell" issue. > > On 12/13/07, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi! > > >> - go for 1.5 > > >> - take advantage of generics > > > +1!!! Frankly speaking this is probably applies to most of commons. > > > > > > If commons wants to stay relevant and not become just legacy we also > > > need to take some steps forward. > > +1 ... long overdue .... maybe too long!? > > > > Ciao, > > Mario > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
