Since I haven't seen any requests for pre-java-5 support I may spend a couple minutes tomorrow cleaning up the pom and possibly removing the dependency on backport-util-concurrent.
thanks david jencks On Nov 1, 2012, at 1:10 AM, Felix Meschberger wrote: > Hi > > Am 31.10.2012 um 21:31 schrieb David Jencks: > >> DS 1.2: AFAIK we've completely implemented the DS 1.2 spec. > > Excellent. > >> I don't really understand the location binding and targeted PID bits. > > It comes from the Configuration Admin spec and must be replicate in SCR since > we basically act like a Configuration Admin service (the configuration > provisioning part) towards the components. > > I think we can live without this for the 1.6.2 relase. > >> >> Java 5: I'm certainly happy with not temporarily removing the java 5-isms, >> but I could still do it if anyone else asks. I havent' done any basic >> housekeeping like removing the pre-java-5 concurrency compatibility code. I >> have no strong feeling about releasing with or without this stuff. > > Ok, lets release with this cruft in and cleanup after the release. > > I just started a thread on the users list asking for opinions regarding our > itended use to just use Java 5 features and API going forward. > > Regards > Felix > >> >> thanks! >> david jencks >> >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Felix Meschberger wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> Am 31.10.2012 um 19:54 schrieb David Jencks: >>> >>>> I updated the changelog from the svn log.... hopefully I didn't miss >>>> anything. >>> >>> Just updated the changelog from the JIRA release notes. >>> >>> Another question crossing my mind: Since the current state passes the most >>> recent CT and checking the changes section in the 4.3 compendium spec I >>> would assume this version also implements Version 1.2 of the DS spec. >>> Correct ? >>> >>> The only thing not fully implemented for the most recent specs is support >>> for the most recent Configuration Admin features like relaxed location >>> binding and targetted PIDs. I can live with that. >>> >>> Regards >>> Felix >>> >>>> >>>> waiting for advice on the other two questions.... >>>> >>>> thanks >>>> david jencks >>>> >>>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:44 AM, David Jencks wrote: >>>> >>>>> At the moment the code uses some java 5. How important is it that this >>>>> release not require java 5? It would not be very difficult to remove the >>>>> java 5-isms and put them back after the release. >>>>> >>>>> I've been marking defects as applying to and fixed in scr-1.8.0. I guess >>>>> we should go back and change them to 1.6.2? >>>>> >>>>> I have not been maintaining the changelog.... that will be a bit of work. >>>>> >>>>> If I don't discover any giant problems before we get the above done I'm >>>>> fine with a release. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> david jencks >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 3:05 AM, Felix Meschberger wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> I see the current trunk build passes our own as well as the OSGi CT >>>>>> tests and there are no open issues marked with 1.6.2. >>>>>> >>>>>> Shall I go ahead and cut a release ? >>>>>> >>>>>> This would IMHO also enable David to continue his refactorings. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Felix >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
