Boy, I'd sure like to see at least one bug-fix release for 2.0 maintain java 1.4 compatibility. Would that be 2.1?
Bill > This sounds reasonable to me. I feel bad about Andi and PyLucene, but it > sounds like GCJ(X) will soon be up-to-date (the link Andi sent was from early > February). Discussion done or? > > Otis > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 7:12:15 PM > Subject: Re: Lucene and Java 1.5 > > : important new facilities. Repeating my earlier question, why should a > : platform that is 2 years behind for java expect to be at the latest and > : greatest level for lucene? I'd propose 2.0 (+ branched patches) be the > : 1.4 release distribution, with 2.1 free to move up to 1.5. > > I would ammend that proposal slightly... > > 1a) Lucene Core 2.0.* releases garuntee java1.4 compatibility > 1b) Lucene Contrib modules in 2.0.* releases are free to require any java > version they choose. > > 2a) Lucene Core 2.1.* release garuntee java1.5 compatibility. > 2b) Lucene Contrib modules in 2.1.* releases are free to require any java > version they choose. > > -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
