Hello Niklas, When you say minor changes might be required to use Mina 1.1.2, are they w.r.t. FTP Server functionality, or w.r.t. maven / build scripts so as to package the upward versions? If they are w.r.t FTP Server functionality, then any specific areas that need to be aware of ?
Thanks and Regards, Atul Gohad. On 11/2/07, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Atul Gohad wrote: > > Hello Niklas / All, > > > > Thanks on the information. Have further 2 points to be clarified: > > > > > > 1. Understanding is that all of the Mina 1.1.* versions are for Java > > 5.0compatibility, so then is Mina > > 1.0.7 equivalent of Mina 1.1.4? > > No, I believe that there has been additional improvements to the 1.1 > branch. As we try to maintain a Java 1.4 compatibility, we'll remain on > the 1.0 branch for now. > > > 2. Is it safe to assume that Mina 1.1.2 will be supported? > > I haven't tried so I won't know for sure. I'm guessing (very) minor > updates on our end might be needed. > > > Additionally what part of Apache FTP Server funtionality needs to be > > regressed so as to confirm compatibility with the latest of Mina? Any > > information on specific test cases to be executed / areas to look into > will > > be helpful. > > I usually try to run our JUnit tests, they should give a fair workaround > for the server. Then, different FTP clients work in different ways, > which causes different behaviors on the server. But, over time we try to > improve our tests by adding these type of cases as well. > > /niklas > > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > Atul Gohad. > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 31, 2007 2:22 AM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Atul Gohad wrote: > >>> Hi Niklas / all , > >>> > >>> Just had a question. Will the Apache FTP Server get affected in case > we > >> are > >>> using the upward versions of SLF4J v1.4.3 and Mina framework. > >>> > >>> I am not so sure on the coupling between Mina and Apache, and the > impact > >>> that it might have when we upgrade to higher versions of mina, rather > >> that > >>> the currently bundled 1.0.2? Understand that the SLF4J upward mobility > >>> should be fine, as that is a light weight component, however, let me > >> know if > >>> my understanding is wrong. > >> Both MINA and SLF4J have been very stable when it comes to upgrades. I > >> just updated our versions to SLF4J 1.4.3 and MINA 1.0.7 and ran our > >> tests succesfully. The change has been checked into SVN. > >> > >> /niklas > >> > >> > > > >
