On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:37:37AM +0100, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > This is to "solve" the junit stuff right? >> >> JUnit is the most prominent project to require Java 5 ATM, but >> hardly the only one. We've had other projects breaking for months >> now because we didn't provide a Java 5 environment. > > Oh. Do you have a (partial) list (in your head or elsewhere)? Are > these projects "leaf" projects or "core" projects?
Leaf. Some of the smartfrog things, myfaces and at least one other that I forget right now. Bill might know, but as he already said, myfaces needs Maven2 now, so we won't be able to build it anyway. > The other big one is the template collections (whatever its called, > the <Foo>List stuff). Generics. > The ant project is an example of a project which is very aware of > its role like that. It won't compile on JDK 1.1 any longer 8-) > I feel that gump is failing in that role with this jdk 1.4 -> 1.5 > stuff, and failing in a big way, and I find it frustrating that > we're not able as a team to contribute a whole lot to easing this > kind of thing and this kind of mess. I've read somewhere that Sun was challenging people to find backwards incompatibilities in Mustang. Maybe we should start building with a 1.6 snapshot. > Its my perception that the people working on JUnit 4 have decided to > take a "bite the bullet" (or the "sour apple") approach to this > migration, and I think this is wrong, They've decided to require JDK 1.5 at compile time. I think JUnit still doesn't require it at runtime if you use the JUnit 3 style of tests. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
