-1 My reasons are not based on technical merit. We have a vocal and helpful user who explicitly states that dropping JDK 1.5 means the end for him and I think that we must take his situation into consideration. As far as I can see there is no "If only we stipulated JDK 1.6 then we could..." requirement so I seriously question the value of doing so.
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: > So, although consider my opinion of 'low impact', I agree with Peter > that there need to be a substantial case for platform-like code to > abandon a previous Java version. IMHO, Java 5 has a LOT of features > that most platforms can leverage to their advantage, Java 6 much less > so... > > My primary project just recently up'ed the requirement to Java 6, due > to a nasty bug in the Generics compiler in Java 5, for which there is > never going to be a fix. If/when there are such issues in River, then > sure... > > As for 'recommended version', it is quite important that River's core > team and test set up are using JDK 1.5 in their toolkits, as it > otherwise quickly 'leaks' 1.6 methods into the codebase. Also, if the > test or build tools require 1.6, then I think that is totally > acceptable as well. > > > Cheers and keep up the good momentum.... > > Cheers > Niclas > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Peter Firmstone <j...@zeus.net.au> wrote: >> -1 Peter Firmstone. >> >> I could vote +1 to dropping support (us fixing something to work around a >> Java 5 only bug) due to the resources of our small team, leaving the door >> open to the community to contribute patches, but not compatibility I'm >> afraid, I just haven't seen a good reason why we need to make River >> incompatible with Java 5. >> >> Is there a feature we need in the platform that requires Java 6? >> >> Are we adding a feature to a proxy that requires Java 6? >> >> I don't think a service implementation (server side) is a good enough reason >> to drop compatibility. >> >> That doesn't mean that we can't produce a service implementation that does >> require Java 6 as a minimum and release it as a separate concern, just that >> it's unreasonable to expect everything else to be dragged along with it. >> >> Note: The QA Test suite requires JDK1.6 to compile, because some of it's >> tests depend on internal Sun Java platform implementation details. The QA >> harness is compatible with earlier versions of Java. The jtreg tests >> require Java 5, due to some tests relying on internal Sun Java platform >> implementation details. >> >> I recommend people use Java 6 if they can, but not everyone is that lucky. >> >> I understand the reasons for making such decisions, but I think we need to >> further investigate breaking the codebase up into smaller easier to maintain >> components, then determining the requirements of each before decisions like >> this are made. We have too much coupling between implementation and >> platform at present. >> >> Peter. >> >> >> > > > > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java > > I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk > I work here; http://tinyurl.com/24svnvk > I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug >
