> Frankly, I am amazed at the pace of GCJ, but it is hard to imagine that > with so much free code out there doing what they need, that it could > take much longer to get 1.5 support.
Just guessing, but could it be that the features in 1.5 and 1.6 are just not compelling enough to motivate many contributors to add them to gcj? Or maybe the plethora of various FOSS Java VMs is confusing the issue. > If they don't have Java 1.5 support in another 6-12 months (with so many > shortcuts available), why let such a laggard in the java community hold > back Lucene? Presumably because what's being done with gcj and Lucene is also an important use of Lucene that the Lucene developers don't wish to gratuitously cripple. > And if they are going to support Java 1.5 within the next > 6-18 months, what is so bad about a short gap time where you are stuck > with Lucene 2.9? No one seems so upset at being stuck with Java 1.4 for > years -- will there really be an uproar if some legacy systems need to > stay with 2.9 for 6 months? It would be sad to expect that Java 1.5 will > not be coming to GCJ soon. And it would seem to be poor engineering, given the past history of gcj development, to predict a time-frame for the emergence of full 1.5 support. Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
