See this thread: http://log4j.markmail.org/thread/23z6w6m6sbwipwff

Particularly this message in the thread: 
http://log4j.markmail.org/thread/23z6w6m6sbwipwff#query:+page:1+mid:uomsjxd6m6zzqkox+state:results

And this message: 
http://log4j.markmail.org/thread/23z6w6m6sbwipwff#query:+page:1+mid:mxqwrtvvoi5zfb6f+state:results

N

On Sep 4, 2013, at 11:20 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:

> Actually, it looks like both 1.9 and 2.2 versions are used in different parts 
> of the POM... I 'm not sure why...
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All:
> 
> Can we have a comment in the main POM as to why we are using an old version 
> of Jackson (1.9) instead of the current version (2.x)?
> 
> Thank you,
> Gary
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] 
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> Spring Batch in Action
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com 
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] 
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> Spring Batch in Action
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com 
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to