To clarify what I've said before, there are two user requirements here; - adding generics to the last release while maintaining compatibility - rethinking some APIs to get the best design features for Java 5+ (non-compatible)
ATM, no one is working on the first that I can see, yet that is what the existing user base actually wants. The users won't be able to upgrade to a non-compatible release, due to the fact that other open source projects depend on the current release. Thus, for me, any non-compatible release is effectively a new project. It would be clearer to rename the project and start again at version 1.0 for the non-compatible codebase. Maybe [collectionsplus]. A lot clearer than what happened with [lang3]. Bear in mind that [lang] (version 2) and [collections] are number 6 and 7 on the most downloaded artifacts list http://search.maven.org/#stats However, the big issue here is that the whole library will need rewriting for JDK 8 due to lambdas. So what does a non-compatible release now actually accomplish? Well, since I'm not being active, I'm not going to stop people. But I am trying to speak up for the users, who just want a compatible bug-fixed, generified version (even if it can't be fully generifed, some generics are better than none). Note that none of this is about Java 5 vs 6. Its about compatibility and what users actually want (remember the maven download stats!!). Stephen On 4 July 2012 11:30, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to java 6 and using the new interfaces, removing classes that can > be replaced with Java 6 code. > > Gary > > On Jul 4, 2012, at 4:32, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org> wrote: > >> FWIW, +1 as well!!! :) >> >> -Simo >> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Jörg Schaible >> <joerg.schai...@scalaris.com> wrote: >>> Stephen Colebourne wrote: >>> >>>> On Java 5/6, I'm in favour of Java 6 at this point. To justify it for >>>> Sebb, someone needs to check to see if any collections in >>>> [collections] could implement the new interfaces added in Java 6 - >>>> NavigableSet, NavigableMap and so on. >>> >>> I am definitely +1 here. Java 6 comes with more interesting interfaces >>> (Deque) and implementations (ArrayDeque explicitly as replacement for Stack) >>> that make more of our stuff obsolete. >>> >>> Anyone who still uses Java 5 has either made the best of 4-year-old cc3 or >>> switched to a different library. And in the light that Java 6 is probably >>> EOL before we release cc4, I see also no reason to stick with Java 5. >>> >>> - Jörg >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
