I think the story of the state of 1.4 should be observed as the reason we need to support 1.5. Too, the state of 1.7, which seemingly is still a way off. Folks will be using 1.5 for a good while to come I believe. The collections changes are good. There are some other good changes. What specifically in 1.6 are you thinking will make it better? I do think, given history as an example, there are a lot of folks though who won't be moving from 1.5 for a long time (years still yet).
Wade ================== Wade Chandler, CCE Software Engineer and Developer Certified Forensic Computer Examiner NetBeans Dream Team Member and Contributor http://www.certified-computer-examiner.com http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/view/NetBeansDreamTeam http://www.netbeans.org ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jeremy Easton-Marks <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 6:27:07 AM > Subject: Re: Migration to Java 5 > > Why are we only talking about 1.5? Why not move to the most current version > of Java, 1.6? I feel by the time we get to look at updating the code that we > will still be far behind. Anybody have any other thoughts on this? > > Jeremy R. Easton-Marks > > "être fort pour être utile" > > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Patrick Wright wrote: > > > Although I raised the issue of 1.4 compatibility, I'm personally in > > favor of moving to use 1.5 language features. I'd just like to keep > > the 1.4 issue in mind, which it seems we are addressing. > > > > The 1.5 compatibility issue has to be addressed in two parts > > (unfortunately): use of language features (enums, annotations) and use > > of new APIs which may not have been backported. For the concurrent > > utilities, there is a backport (though I'm not sure it's being > > maintained) but for many other Java APIs, there is no backport. We ran > > into this on another 1.4-compatible FOSS project I work on where new > > methods were added to the XML parsing APIs in Java 5 and 6. > > > > I think one can solve that in part by seeking to maintain > > interoperability between River Vx and Jini 2.1. That way, people > > always have the option to host their existing code on Jini 2.1, and > > use parts of River under 1.5 where it makes sense for them. > > > > > > Patrick > >
