We ought to consider whether we are willing to maintain James v2 for JRE 1.3+ and James v3 for JRE 1.4+. Considering that James v2 works well, and James v3 will be a while in development, I have some inclination to suggest that we adopt JRE 1.4+ for James v3. On the other hand, there is always some risk involved in moving raising the JRE required.I don't personally deal with this headache anymore, but if we leave the option to use 1.3 then we leave James open to be used on FreeBSD or other non-directly supported platforms that don't have ports yet.
Thoughts?
Kenny Smith
JournalScape.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
