By stating that I needed to run on Mac OS 9, this also implies that I
need to run on OSX prior to Tiger (10.4) which does not have Java 5 and
according to everything that I read, won't. OSX 10.3 does not seem like
an unreasonable target platform for Lucene applications.
Robert Engels wrote:
If you need to run on OS9 then run Lucene 1.9 (or it seems 2.0, just not
2.1).
You have a working, stable release that runs under 1.4. There are MANY
applications that don't run under OS9 now (they require OSX). Why should
Lucene be any different? I am fairly certain you cannot even purchase OS9
from Apple anymore.
1.9 is a fine Lucene release. I suggest stopping 1.4 JDK support at 1.9. 2.0
is bound to have many bug fixes, etc. and having the developers work in 1.4
when everyone else is in 1.5 seems crazy.
I think the issues like ThreadLocal, etc. which are fixed in the 1.5
libraries are reason enough to move. You can't get Sun to fix these old JDK
issues, why should we be attempting to work around them.
-----Original Message-----
From: DM Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 8:52 AM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene and Java 1.5
Please don't move to Java 5.
My reasons are simple (and some perhaps stem out of old information or
misinformation):
MacOS 9 does not run Java 1.5, which is one of my target platforms.
Has Java 5 been ported to all target platforms?
Java 5 has nice syntax sugar but no real substance other than the
stronger type checking.
(My opinion based on porting to Java 5 and then back to Java 1.4.2.)
Not all support tooling (e.g. java2html, checkstyle, findbugs, ...)
supports Java 5 syntax. This reduces my ability to qa code using these
tools.
Java 5 moves lucene away from the possibility of ever working on J2ME.
Java 5 moves away from running on an open source java, e.g. gjc.
The performance benefits of a Java 5 JVM are independent of Java 5
source.
Going to Java 5 requires all applications using Lucene to upgrade to
Java 5.
Sure Java 5 has been out for a while and Java 6 is around the corner, but
ask yourself why it is not the defacto standard version of Java.
karl wettin wrote:
Will code with 1.5 syntax be committed?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
