some comments inlined .... Am 09.12.2011 um 13:20 schrieb Andy Seaborne:
> If we want to upgrade, now would be good time. > > Xerces: > > We currently use 2.7.1. (= 2005-07) > > Proposal: version 2.10.0 > > June 2010, which is the latest in Maven central. > > There is a 2.11.0 (Nov 2010) but it's not in maven central (nor Apache). This issue is tracked, at least [1]. Voting might help in accelerating it. Also, someone reported that other repositories contain 2.11.0, see very last comment. > > So 2.11.0 is possibly bug fixes This [2] explains it in detail. > but the download of difficult available is IMHO not worth it if all our tests > pass. jena-core passes > > ICU4J: > > We use 3.4.4 (March 2006); latest is 4.8.1.1 (August 2011) > > I tried the newest version and some test (punycode) in the IRI library > failed, or rather failed to fail as they look like negative tests). > > It would be good if some one tried out other versions to see where changes > impact us come from and/or fix the tests. (You probably want me to sort the > rest of the release issues out!) A while ago I was checking briefly where ICU4J is actually referenced in the code (in the hope to find a way to factor it out since at that time we wanted to use Jena on the Android platform and had concerns about the footprint of ICU4J). As far as I remember, there are only very few (one or two). Which brings me to ask/propose the following: Would it be possible to check whether the functionality used from ICU4J is provided similarly meanwhile by the JDK (or another library that is already a dependency)? If possible - if its possible to implement it in an alternative way - then this (heavyweight) dependency can be removed completely. Thorsten [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1454 [2] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/releases.html > > Default: leave as is > > Andy
