They do, on snow leopard :) Anyway, I don't feel too strongly about it, certainly won't block 1.6 if others think it's a good idea.
-Matej On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > At our company we've been deploying to 1.6 for over 2 years now. I > know... since I'm on a (32bit) Mac and all my co-workers were able to > compile against 1.6 leaving me behind... Now that even developers on > Macs have Java 6, I seriously think that 1.5 is a dead platform. > > Martijn > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Matej Knopp <matej.kn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I really don't think our core should depend on 1.6. Those few methods >> can easyly be put to util classes. Typesafe models can be moved to >> separate sub project. I know it makes the build more complicated >> again, but 1.6 isn't that common, especially not in production. >> >> -Matej >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Carl-Eric Menzel >> <cm.wic...@users.bitforce.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:44:23 +0100 >>> Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I was going to propose a vote in that direction... as JDK 1.5 has been >>>> shelved... >>>> >>> >>> It'll be years until Java 1.6 is as common as 1.5 is now. There are many >>> organizations who have only just completed the move to 1.5. I think >>> going to a strict requirement for Java 1.6 would be a really bad idea, >>> especially since it does not offer as many significant new benefits as >>> 1.5 did. >>> >>> Offering 1.6-specific features in a separate jar would be a simple and >>> pretty good solution, I think. Stuff like the typesafe model would thus >>> be available for those who need it, without leaving anybody needlessly >>> stranded. >>> >>> Carl-Eric >>> >> > > > > -- > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com > Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.4 >
