+1 If a device is too small to use post 1.4 features, go the surrogate route. Sean
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Jonathan Costers < [email protected]> wrote: > I agree with Dennis and Jim. We should be looking foward, not backwards. > > To add to Jim's point, I believe there are probably more urgent things to > do > than upgrade the complete River distribution to be using post-1.4 features. > Then again, when introducing new things, we should not limit ourselves to > 1.4. > > Best > Jonathan > > 2009/3/27 Jim Waldo <[email protected]> > > > I have to agree with Dennis. Most of us are now using 1.6; 1.7 is > underway. > > I don't think the small device space should be much of an issue; most of > > those devices won't support a full Jini function anyway, since they lack > > class loading (that's why we did the surrogate architecture). > > > > Going back and upgrading to post-1.4 features throughout can probably > wait. > > But that is no reason not to use them when they make sense in new code. > > > > Jim Waldo > > > > > > On Mar 27, 2009, at 7:45 AM, Dennis Reedy wrote: > > > > > >> On Mar 27, 2009, at 720AM, Patrick Wright wrote: > >> > >> Just because the current River codebase is limited to 1.4 doesnt mean > new > >>>> work should be constrained to that right? > >>>> > >>> > >>> I think one has to be careful with compatibility across small-device > >>> VMs, which, AFAIK, in some cases are 1.4 compatible (cf. JavaME). > >>> > >> > >> Well, and IMHO, keeping the core of River based on a technology that is > in > >> it's EOL transition period (http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/) for the > sake > >> of *possible* use for small device deployments may not be ideal. > >> > >> Dennis > >> > > > > >
