On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 15:26 -0500, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > On 11/1/06, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... > I wasn't implying we require JCL 1.1 now, but that when we do, we > diligently upgrade with each new release (for those components that > release). Otherwise we have Foo that needs 1.0.2 and Bar that needs > 1.1 and it cannot be obvious to everyone what its implication on > needing Foo and Bar together is. > Rahul, I am fine with (and probably in favor of) all Commons simultaneously upgrading to a specific version of JCL (or any other common dependency). In practical terms, though, that would pretty much mean that I personally stop testing the component(s) I am maintaining against older versions of JCL, thus rendering them de-facto EOL. Wouldn't it be better to just come out and declare JCL x.y.z end-of-life / no longer supported? Oleg > > > Take it for what it is worth. > > > <snip/> > > You're modest ;-) > > -Rahul > > > > Oleg > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
