--- Robert Engels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It was a joke.
;-) Yes, I did realize that. But I have seen earlier references, with more serious tone... and it did seem like some people actually believed 1.4 compatibility was a "back to stone age" requirement. Anyway, lots of good points being presented and all: and in the end I'm lucky enough that none of my current (or immediate work) will be on pre-1.5 platform. -+ Tatu +- > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tatu Saloranta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 11:55 AM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: Results (Re: Survey: Lucene and Java > 1.4 vs. 1.5) > > --- Robert Engels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think you should port Lucene to MS-DOS... > > > > If your app can't move beyond MS-DOS, then you > stick with version 1.9 > > (or 2.0 in this case). > > > > If you can't innovate and move forward, you die. > > > > Java has a GREAT history of supporting prior > versions. At some point > > though you need to be able to move forward since > developers may not be > > trained in the "legacy" environment. > > While this is true, I thinks that comparisons of > Lucene to, say, MS-DOS are > at best a knee-jerk comments, or otherwise imply > some lack of perspective > and common sense (probably former though). > Lucene has moved away from JDK 1.1 support, and at > this point 1.4 is > probably the baseline. This has happened over time, > as platform has > advanced. And it's bit curious as to what the > current mad rush regarding > migration is -- beyond the convenience and syntactic > sugar, only the > concurrency package seems like a tempting immediate > reason? > > Now, I think Doug had best points regarding inertia > that low-level libraries > and components should consider. Apps are first to > move to newest versions; > top-level libraries then, and finally fundamental > components and engines. I > would think Lucene falls into this category: it has > few dependencies of its > own, but has tons of downstream dependencies. > > I don't know if this has suggested yet, but how > about switching to 1.5, when > Sun declares 1.6 to be the official stable JDK (ie. > when it comes out of its > beta status)? > > Anyway, it obviously comes down to the active > committers to decide the > time/version for the cut-off. > But I hope it can be a practical decision made with > cool minds. > > -+ Tatu +- > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
