Michael J. Segel wrote: > On Tuesday 02 August 2005 23:39, Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > >>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>Is this acceptable? If not, how would you like to see Derby handle the >>>sunsetting of jdk1.3 support? [Sun,IBM,Blackdown dates & comments omitted] > Sigh, not to start a flame war.... Not a flame war, but the end-of-service dates of VMs are a piece of the information for deciding on continuing 1.3 support. I work for IBM but was not suggesting that Derby follow IBM service dates for 1.3 support, only pointing out there there are other VMs aside from Sun's, with different end-of-service dates. Other, more important factors for 1.3 support (or indeed any version) are: - is there demand for Derby support on 1.3? - are there people willing contribute effort to keep Derby running on 1.3 (e.g. testing etc.)? Hopefully if there are people who still want Derby to run on 1.3, a subset of them are willing to help out on that effort. I do think a reasonable approach is for the next release to be the last Derby release to support 1.3. Dan.
