On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:40 AM, Alex Karasulu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Stefan Seelmann <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On 2/9/11 12:18 AM, Stefan Seelmann wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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. >>> >>> I was more specifically thinking about companies using ADS for unit tests. I >>> have some clients doing that. >> >> Ok. There is no hurry to switch now, as we have a workaround for the >> concurrency tests. > > Oh? What's up?
Please see http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/directory-dev/201102.mbox/%[email protected]%3E http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1068307
