Hi Joel,
the build dependencies between 1.6.1 and 2.0 changed in the following way:
* Jaxen 1.1-beta-6 -> 1.1.1
* pull-parser 2 -> 2.1.10
* xpp3 1.1.3.3 -> 1.1.4c
The test dependencies will probably change more, but perhaps I will
remove some dependencies from the list rather than append some new.
Hi Filip,
On 14 Oct 2008, at 17:48, Filip Jirsák wrote:
> dom4j 2.0 will as backwards compatible as possible except necessary
> changes needed by upgrade to Java 5 (generics, W3C DOM 3 etc.) It
> means no new dependencies and only a little of new code. I don't know
> what exactly IP review means
dom4j 2.0 will as backwards compatible as possible except necessary
changes needed by upgrade to Java 5 (generics, W3C DOM 3 etc.) It
means no new dependencies and only a little of new code. I don't know
what exactly IP review means - if it means license and dependencies
review, there will be no ch
Thanks for the reply Filip. I should have mentioned that we are
working against 1.6.1. I am not sure if we are prepared to move to 2.0
because it require a new IP review process. In case we do consider is
2.0 backwards compatible with 1.6.1 except in regards to the removed
deprecations?
Hi,
I don't know how deep is Jaxen interlaced in dom4j code. On the other
hand I think it is in dom4j intention to afford interfaces which can
have different implementations. Dom4j itself has org.dom4j interfaces
and org.dom4j.tree, org.dom4j.dom and org.dom4j.bean implementation,
so why not use th
