Matt Benson-2 wrote > > Maybe the right approach is to start with Java 6, then whoever likes to > can > investigate how much work it would take to restore Java 5 > compatibility. > Seems like a reasonable proposal to me; it means Java 1.5 is a "nice to have" feature - not a "must have" - feature as it currently stands. If someone needs a Java 1.5 backport, he can contribute to the project by doing so. Do-ocracy at work. Fair enough? Cheers Henrib
PS: may be at the process/Commons level, we could introduce another category for of our projects. Instead of the current 3 "Proper, Sandbox, Dormant", something like "Stable (1.5-able), Proper, Sandox, Dormant" or "Modern, Proper (1.5 able), Sandbox, Dormant". So new versions can go "modern" till the need arise & a contribution is made for a "stable" version. Just a thought... -- View this message in context: http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Can-the-next-version-major-version-of-a-project-require-Java6-i-e-drop-Java-1-5-tp4160635p4164066.html Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
