Hi, I think also that the integration with CDI will be a good thing for the next version (2).
Rgds, Thibault 2013/5/14 Brian Demers <[email protected]> > I think this is a good idea > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Kalle Korhonen > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > Don't have strong objections. I'm for JDK 1.7 for 2.0 for the same > reasons > > as Les. What I see is a small percentage of companies still on JDK 1.5 > for > > whatever reasons but those on JDK 1.6 either planning on upgrading to JDK > > 1.7 or have already done so (but that's all anecdotal). We could even > test > > the waters with an eventual alpha release of 2.0 with JDK 1.7 and if that > > doesn't fly too well, we could still downgrade in beta/GA release. > > > > Kalle > > > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > I don't have any strong objections to this. Does anyone else feel > > > strongly one way or another? > > > > > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Brian Demers <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > I'm a little hesitent about dropping 1.6, as it may slow the adoption > > of > > > 2.0 > > > > > > > > It is unfortunate, but 1.6 is likely to stay in production in many > > shops > > > > for a few years. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Les Hazlewood < > [email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > >> P.S. I also believe Shiro 2.x should target JDK 1.7 and above. 1.6 > is > > > >> already past its public end-of-life period, and since it will take a > > > >> little while to get a 2.0 version out, I'd hesitate to target > > > >> something that will be even that much more out of date. > > > >> > > > >> Anyone feel otherwise? > > > >> > > > >> Best, > > > >> > > > >> Les > > > >> > > > >> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Les Hazlewood < > [email protected] > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > Hi dev team, > > > >> > > > > >> > I made the following initial changes in SVN to facilitate > > kickstarting > > > >> > development on Shiro 2.x: > > > >> > > > > >> > 1. I moved (using 'svn move' to retain version history) the > > existing > > > >> > trunk to a new 1.x branch located here: > > > >> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shiro/branches/1.x > > > >> > > > > >> > If we ever feel the need to release a 1.3 version before 2.0, this > > is > > > >> > the branch where that work would exist (also continuously merging > > any > > > >> > bugfixes from 1.2.x into 1.x). > > > >> > > > > >> > 2. I copied (using 'svn copy') this 1.x branch to what is now the > > > >> > trunk here: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shiro/trunk > > > >> > > > > >> > 3. I'll be updating the poms to reflect version > 2.alpha.0-SNAPSHOT > > > >> > > > > >> > I suspect we'll want to make some alpha and then beta releases > > before > > > >> > we release 2.0.0 final. If you guys have any concerns or ideas > > about > > > >> > the versioning scheme, please discuss. > > > >> > > > > >> > 4. I'll start extracting config-specific things (Ini-specific > > > >> > configuration mechanisms, etc) to a separate config module. > Please > > > >> > review (and edit) > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SHIRO/Version+2+Brainstorming > > > >> > with any additional ideas related to this effort so we can > discuss. > > > >> > > > > >> > All of the above actions are based on our previous 'Spring > Cleaning' > > > >> > thread discussion so I don't think anyone would have issues with > > this. > > > >> > They are easily reversible however, so let me know if you have > > > >> > concerns. > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > >> > > > > >> > Les > > > >> > > > > > >
