Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2004-01-02 Thread dion
David Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/12/2003 07:41:31 AM: > > --- "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This has come up in regards to using some of java.nio in Commons/Net > > also. > > > I say we leave the last release as 1.1 compatible and move on to using > > > 1.4+ for

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-31 Thread Daniel F. Savarese
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geir Magnusson Jr writes: >Don't forget that not all platforms have 1.4 or a mature 1.4 that >people trust. it too a while for apple to get 1.4 out to OS X - I >wouldn't use OS X in production of course, but it's my development >platform... Absolutely. J2SE 1

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-31 Thread Phil Steitz
Shapira, Yoav wrote: Howdy, Here is a recent TSS survey of J2EE containers that shows jdk levels supported by different containers: http://www.theserverside.com/reviews/matrix.jsp Please be careful when relying on these -- for example, it doesn't have tomcat 5. ;) I wish there was some sort of

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-31 Thread Paul Libbrecht
On 30-Dec-03, at 22:08 Uhr, Phil Steitz wrote: David Graham wrote: There will always be users that will complain when changing Java versions. The only semi-valid reason I've heard to not upgrade to 1.4 is that product X requires 1.3 and product X is expensive. Where often "Product X" is a comm

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Craig R. McClanahan
Quoting Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The block on 1.4 remains the big-iron webservers, like Websphere and > Weblogic. 1.4 as a requirement is a long way off yet IMHO. > FWIW, one of the major roadblocks for the app server vendors was that J2EE 1.4 (which in turn requires J2SE 1.4) w

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread btomasini
that means OS patches. For our OS/400 and S/390 customers this is a BIG deal. Gary -Original Message- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 09:07 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Moving up to JVM 1.4+ This has come up in regards to u

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Vic Cekvenich
S upgrades. For new JRE versions, on certain OS's, that means OS patches. For our OS/400 and S/390 customers this is a BIG deal. Gary -Original Message- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 09:07 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: M

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Phil Steitz
David Graham wrote: There will always be users that will complain when changing Java versions. The only semi-valid reason I've heard to not upgrade to 1.4 is that product X requires 1.3 and product X is expensive. Where often "Product X" is a commerical J2EE container (see below) and what is "

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Stephen Colebourne
The block on 1.4 remains the big-iron webservers, like Websphere and Weblogic. 1.4 as a requirement is a long way off yet IMHO. Stephen - Original Message - From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This has come up in regards to using some of java.nio in Commons/Net also. > > I sa

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr
On Dec 30, 2003, at 3:41 PM, David Graham wrote: --- "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This has come up in regards to using some of java.nio in Commons/Net also. I say we leave the last release as 1.1 compatible and move on to using 1.4+ for new versions. Personally, I use JVM 1.4+, my

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread David Graham
--- "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This has come up in regards to using some of java.nio in Commons/Net > also. > > I say we leave the last release as 1.1 compatible and move on to using > > 1.4+ for new versions. > > Personally, I use JVM 1.4+, myself. However, everytime we do

RE: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Shapira, Yoav
t [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:45 PM >To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >Subject: Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+ > >Our current server (ActiveMath) is blocked entirely by JDK 1.4: it's a >server with slightly too heavy memory requirements and the resu

Re: Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Paul Libbrecht
Our current server (ActiveMath) is blocked entirely by JDK 1.4: it's a server with slightly too heavy memory requirements and the result is... OutOfMemoryError on most Unix-VMs if in JDK 1.4. (especially true on MacOSX, very frequent on Sun and Blackdown's on Linux). Hence the wish not to depend

Moving up to JVM 1.4+

2003-12-30 Thread Noel J. Bergman
> This has come up in regards to using some of java.nio in Commons/Net also. > I say we leave the last release as 1.1 compatible and move on to using > 1.4+ for new versions. Personally, I use JVM 1.4+, myself. However, everytime we do a survey on server-user, we get emphatic feedback from our us