Ferdinand Soethe wrote: > > Any comments on this proposal? Yes i sent comments under another thread name: "required Java version" Would someone please follow up. It is a very important point.
--David > Ferdinand Soethe wrote: > > > David Crossley wrote: > > >>> >>- Set your Java version to be the lowest specified of our supported > >>> >>versions. > >>> > > >>> >Where is the definitive info on the supported versions? The FAQ says > >>> >we need Java 1.4 or better. Does that mean it has to be 1.4.0 or can > >>> >it be 1.4.x > >>> > >>> 1.4.0 > > >> Oooh, glad you asked that question. I was just going to use 1.4.1 > >> Last time i did not use 1.3.0 rather 1.3.1 > > > I think that we should test with 1.4 in its most current > > fix-version and update our requirements to reflect that. > > > If we test against 1.4.0 we might find bugs that result from bugs in > > 1.4.0 and have been fixed in the more recent versions. And we might > > not find bugs that have been introduced with these fixes. > > > So we are hurting people that do what you should be doing (update your > > java regularly to the latest fix version) to what end? > > > -- > > Ferdinand Soethe
