On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/8/11 5:59 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote: >> >> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 2/8/11 1:43 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny<[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 2/8/11 10:32 AM, Stefan Seelmann wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Stefan Seelmann<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I found something over at stackoverflow to define different compile >>>>>>> versions for main and test code [4], I'll test that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Obviously that won't work because JDK5 doesn't have a Java6 compiler. >>>>>> >>>>>> So what I would suggest is to copy the classes from [5] with the >>>>>> original package names and license/copyright headers to our >>>>>> junit-addons module. As the classes have the ALv2 license header we >>>>>> are safe to copy them. An advantage is that once we switch to Java6 we >>>>>> can drop those classes and use the com.mycila:mycila-junit dependency. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> Go for it. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure we can drop Java 5 now, many users are still using it... >>>> >>>> One more reason why they should switch to Java 6. Java 5 is way slower. >>>> >>>> IMO we should not have to keep building for it. Java 7 is out. We're >>>> supporting 6& 7. >>> >>> Frankly, I wish we can drop Java 5 completely, but I'm afraid it's still >>> widely used in enterprises : >>> http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=61645 >>> >>> Even if this poll is not realistic, it says that 34% of the companies are >>> still using Java 5 :/ : >>> "Question four: At work, what JVM do you target compilation for? >>> >>> Java 6 won again, with 247 responses (58%); Java 1.4 got 33 (8%), Java 5 >>> got >>> 146 (34%). One person said they used Retroweaver for clients with 1.4." >> >> I hear you. I'd rather focus on the majority. And soon this will >> change. By the time we're out the door with a GA it's not going to be >> a matter of contention. >> >> When hunting I always used to target slightly ahead of a running >> animal. Why? Because I like killing bambi. Well you get my point ... >> >> It's no sweat off my back because I'm just not dealing with the >> overhead of this. Thought it might spare others managing it some pain. > > All in all, switching to Java 6 is not *that* bad. i'm just wondering if the > problem we have with the concurrent test tooling (which requires Java6) > can't be workarounded by requiring the code to be compiled using Java 5 and > run with Java 6. > > If not, then, well, let's go for Java 6
I think a test dependency (even when helpful by speeding up the build and detecting concurrency issues) isn't worth that step. I agree with Emmanuel that Java 5 or older is still used in companies (just like in my current project). But I think Java 5 is mainly used by commercial software like the fat application servers or ERP software. If a company decides to use ApacheDS we can expect that they know that there is something beyond Java 5. My 2 cents, Stefan
