On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Stanislav Muhametsin <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting Rickard Öberg <[email protected]>: > >> No, the point is that most organizations *already have* a decision on JDK >> version. So when choosing tools, they have to fit into the policy. Not the >> other way round. > > By my own experience I know what you mean but it doesn't have to work that > way. I believe there are far better methods of handling tools than enforcing > some policy, which changes once in two years, if even then. But if everyone > just conforms with it, the way of doing things will never change. Oh well, > this is getting philisophical again ;)
I think it depends on the organization. My company (huge) happens to support 3 different ones, and up to developer to track the bugs in each one and decide how they affect their systems (for instance, some recent 1.6.0_NN had a timezone bug for the DST change in NY (probably elsewhere) and each team had to understand the impact and change accordingly. I think that the hardest policies are in mid-sized companies where the 'proliferation' is leading to more support than they want to have and think that a single thing of everything (i.e. policy) solves that problem. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
