Thanks for your input Manuel.
I don't think there seems to be any major problems with switching OpenJUMP
development to JDK 1.5. I will propose this to the mailing list.
The Sunburned Surveyor
On 4/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Sunburned
We read this post and list in general with attention. There are very
important matter in them. Memory usage as you say, for example, was a
main problem (and limitation) until we resolve it for us to work in
production environment. Last weeks have been very intense ones. We
made an official presentation of Kosmo in our region University and we
spend a lot of effort in it.
Anycase about JDK by the moment we had no important troubles switching
to 1.5. In fact we had a more responsive system. In windows management
usability and also in processing speed. 5-10% better perhaps. Not too
much working with small datasets but sensible if you work with very
big ones.
Some mails ago you spoke about manuals/wikis. We are in the procces to
start one (wiki). We think what you said about switching from wiki to
writen manual is very important. We are evaluating "Moing Moing Wiki".
It look that have some tools to generate paper documents from wiki
content. (Also has a wysiwyg editor and you can add multimedia
content). We can keep inform about that if you want.
Manuel Navarro
Kosmo-Team
Quoting Sunburned Surveyor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Larry and Michael have suggested moving our development of OpenJUMP to
one
> of the newer JDK's. I had considered this a few weeks ago, and I had
even
> sent an e-mail to Vivid Solutions to confirm what version JDK they are
> working with for JUMP development. They confirmed the use of JDK 1.4.2,
> which is what OpenJUMP is also "officially" built on.
>
> I have been building OpenJUMP on JDK 1.5 and 1.6 using Eclipse with no
> problems. I have also been running that build of OPenJUMP on the 1.5
> and 1.6JRE with no problems. I think Larry mentioned the same thing. I
> think there
> are a lot of advantages to keeping up with the advancements in the Java
> langauge.
>
> However, I do have at least 2 concerns about making this move:
>
> [1] I don't want to break compatibility with JUMP. I think we should ask
> Vivid Solutions about there plans in this regard. Perhaps they have a
good
> reason for waiting on the migration to a new JDK.
>
> [2] I don't want to mess with our Linux users, althought there isn't
likely
> a lot of them. I'm a Linux user though. :] Now that Debian has worked
out an
> agreement with Sun and their are "official" Debian packages for the SUN
JRE
> and JDK I don't think this will be as much of a problem. The unstable
> version of Debian now includes the 1.5.0 JDK. I'd like it if we didn't
move
> farther ahead with the JDK than the Debian packagers. But this probably
> impacts me more than anyone else, so I could compromise...
>
> I'd like to get some thoughts on this from Erwan, Ugo (if he is still
> listening), and Stefan (if he can make time). It would also be
interesting
> to see what the Kosmo team thinks, if they read this post.
>
> The Sunburned Surveyor
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Jump-pilot-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
