-1 to 1.6 dependencies in Wicket core. +1 to additional 1.6-dependent features in separate jars.
-- Carl-Eric Menzel Das neue deutschsprachige Wicketbuch: Wicket: Komponentenbasierte Webanwendungen in Java http://www.wicketbuch.de/ On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 07:25:40 -0500 James Carman <jcar...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > -1 to moving to 1.6. My client, a global consumer products company, > is not on 1.6 yet and it took me YEARS to get 1.5. So, I don't see it > happening anytime soon unfortunately. > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Steve Swinsburg > <steve.swinsb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Huh? As has been said, Snow Leopard (OS X 10.6) has Java 1.6 by > > default. Leopard (OS X 10.5) even has it installed, just not linked > > by default. > > > > +1 to moving to Java 1.6. Java 1.5 is past EOL. > > > > cheers, > > Steve > > > > > > > > On 15/12/2009, at 10:47 PM, Johan Compagner wrote: > > > >> mac's should be totally ignored in this area (and all other area's > >> if you ask me) > >> apple and java is the biggest pile of crap i ever worked with > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45, Matej Knopp <matej.kn...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> They do, on snow leopard :) > >>> > >>> Anyway, I don't feel too strongly about it, certainly won't block > >>> 1.6 if others think it's a good idea. > >>> > >>> -Matej > >>> > >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst > >>> <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> At our company we've been deploying to 1.6 for over 2 years now. > >>>> I know... since I'm on a (32bit) Mac and all my co-workers were > >>>> able to compile against 1.6 leaving me behind... Now that even > >>>> developers on Macs have Java 6, I seriously think that 1.5 is a > >>>> dead platform. > >>>> > >>>> Martijn > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Matej Knopp > >>>> <matej.kn...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> I really don't think our core should depend on 1.6. Those few > >>>>> methods can easyly be put to util classes. Typesafe models can > >>>>> be moved to separate sub project. I know it makes the build > >>>>> more complicated again, but 1.6 isn't that common, especially > >>>>> not in production. > >>>>> > >>>>> -Matej > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Carl-Eric Menzel > >>>>> <cm.wic...@users.bitforce.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:44:23 +0100 > >>>>>> Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I was going to propose a vote in that direction... as JDK 1.5 > >>>>>>> has been shelved... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It'll be years until Java 1.6 is as common as 1.5 is now. > >>>>>> There are > >>> many > >>>>>> organizations who have only just completed the move to 1.5. I > >>>>>> think going to a strict requirement for Java 1.6 would be a > >>>>>> really bad idea, especially since it does not offer as many > >>>>>> significant new benefits as 1.5 did. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Offering 1.6-specific features in a separate jar would be a > >>>>>> simple and pretty good solution, I think. Stuff like the > >>>>>> typesafe model would thus be available for those who need it, > >>>>>> without leaving anybody needlessly stranded. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Carl-Eric > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: > >>>> http://wicketinaction.com Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type > >>>> safety for web applications Get it now: > >>>> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.4 > >>>> > >>> > > > >
