In my first email, I pointed out several things that would need to be changed. You can simply search for the util concurrent import and find them all. "EDU.oswego.cs.dl.util.concurrent"
ClockDaemon is used more than the poooled executor. . . . Yes, there is a backport for JDK 1.4. A backport implements something available only in a new version. In this case, the backport is of the 1.5 concurrent library. This allows you to compile and run in 1.4. But if you are running 1.5 or later, you don't need to backport jar. There are some subtle changes between the two. But it should be perfectly possible to get it working in a few days. Take a crack at it if you want. I'll get to it in about two weeks. Aaron --- On Thu, 8/27/09, Jeffrey Kesselman <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Jeffrey Kesselman <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Remove dependency for concurrent.jar > To: "JCS Users List" <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 8:02 AM > Well i don't know the codebase so > Aaron is your better reference there > BUT... > > Since the large majority of Doug's concurrent library got > ported as is into > the JDK, Id start by simply taking his library out of your > build path in > eclipse. Then follow the errors and everywhere it > can't find a reference to > a concurrent utility, use's Eclipse's help to add the > proper import. > > Id imagine it cant be more then a day or two of very > mechanical work... > > Alternately, if your a perl type hacker you could try > writing a script that > would look for the string that is doug's package name in > the file and > repalce it with the JDK package. > > JK > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Nuno Sénica <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Jeffrey and Aaron, > > > > We are currently evaluating the effort to perform > those changes.. If the > > effort is not that big, I personally, would like to > make that change and > > contribute to the community. > > > > I'll need some guideline from where to start, and > regarding that I'm > > relying > > on you guys :D > > > > Which should be the best approach to start this change > ? > > > > Regards, > > Nuno > > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 15:30, Jeffrey Kesselman > <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > The source is available, couldn't you go through > it and change the > > > references yourselves? > > > > > > That seems a lot less costly then abandoning the > whole library. > > > > > > Maybe you could even contribute those changes > back to the community... > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 7:02 AM, Nuno Sénica > <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > At the company where I work for, we have an > application which relies on > > > JCS > > > > and it has proven to be a good solution so > far. But now, we were > > informed > > > > about legal issues by using concurrent lib > and we are being instructed > > to > > > > change the caching lib. > > > > > > > > My question is if there's any plan to use > the native concurrent instead > > > of > > > > the lib that JSC depend on at the moment ? > Is so, when it is planned to > > > be > > > > available ? > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Nuno > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ~~ Microsoft help desk says: reply hazy, ask > again later. ~~ > > > > > > > > > -- > ~~ Microsoft help desk says: reply hazy, ask again later. > ~~ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
