Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Daniel Gandara wrote:
ITC's rmi is 5.0 compliant and dependent, but we realized that Harmony
was 1.4;
so, since our package made use of still not available 5.0 features (like
j.u.c) , we
decide to deploy a 1.4 version of the code, in which we remove all 5.0
dependencies.
I believe that's the reason why rmi2.1.4
Can we resolve down to 1 version of RMI and cull goodness from the rest?
I believe given the fact that j.u.c is not there and no one is working on
it,
1.4 version is the one that should remain for now (remember there is a
performance penalty compared to 5.0), when j.u.c be there we can
easily include it.
I see no point in keeping the 5.0 since it cannot be run with current
classlib...
What do you think?
is there any advance with getting j.u.c?
According to Doug, we should just be able to use what we want from there.
IIRC, Doug's assertion is that since this was the first implementation of
j.u.c, and it was done in the public view, it therefore cannot be
influenced by some other version, since there wasn't any other versions
around.
I'll start a new thread and we'll see if we can get doug to comment.
I'll keep an eye on it to see what Doug says.
Daniel
geir
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
