Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Christoph Gaffga wrote: The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. but what about the maximum support JDK? I tried to compile with 1.5beta, but it didn't work. So I compiled with 1.4 and let it run with 1.5. The gc ist much better with 1.5! Did you solve your problems with running ant using JDK? I proposed to run Ant with a JRE 1.5 and use the 1.5 compiler explicitly in the javac task of Ant. Did you try this? -- Reinhard
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Reinhard Pötz dijo: Did you solve your problems with running ant using JDK? I proposed to run Ant with a JRE 1.5 and use the 1.5 compiler explicitly in the javac task of Ant. Did you try this? It would be fine to already include it in the build system. Soon or later we will need to make the change. Doing it right now, will encourge more people to let do a try. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Antonio Gallardo wrote: Reinhard Pötz dijo: Did you solve your problems with running ant using JDK? I proposed to run Ant with a JRE 1.5 and use the 1.5 compiler explicitly in the javac task of Ant. Did you try this? It would be fine to already include it in the build system. Soon or later we will need to make the change. Doing it right now, will encourge more people to let do a try. Yes, we could make the compiler configurable. If I have some time I'll make the change. -- Reinhard
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Hello Pier, Pier Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: NIO is nice (indeed) for a bunch of things, and as Alan pointed out, using RegEx in the 2.2 sitemap would be a killer, but IMVHO for this release we have MUCH BIGGER fishes to fry: blocks and continuations. does Sun regex offer any significant advantages over ORO or jakarta regexp ? Just curious. Martin
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Martin Holz wrote: does Sun regex offer any significant advantages over ORO or jakarta regexp ? Just curious. Probably just the fact that we'd ship one less JAR file. Ugo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
* Ugo Cei [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-03 08:15]: Martin Holz wrote: does Sun regex offer any significant advantages over ORO or jakarta regexp ? Just curious. Probably just the fact that we'd ship one less JAR file. That was my point. (Though a change would break sitemaps depending on ORO specific patterns, if there is such a thing.) -- Alan / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://engrm.com/ aim/yim: alanengrm - icq: 228631855 - msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regexps (was Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2)
Alan wrote: * Ugo Cei [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-03 08:15]: Probably just the fact that we'd ship one less JAR file. That was my point. (Though a change would break sitemaps depending on ORO specific patterns, if there is such a thing.) At the cost of breaking some sitemaps, and since it's more or less clear that we're going to require JDK 1.4 for 2.2, I'll probably propose to drop Jakarta ORO in favour of the JDK's package (unless it's seriously broken) ... travel light. Ugo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. but what about the maximum support JDK? I tried to compile with 1.5beta, but it didn't work. So I compiled with 1.4 and let it run with 1.5. The gc ist much better with 1.5! regards Christoph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Regexps (was Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2)
Ugo Cei wrote: Alan wrote: * Ugo Cei [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-03 08:15]: Probably just the fact that we'd ship one less JAR file. That was my point. (Though a change would break sitemaps depending on ORO specific patterns, if there is such a thing.) At the cost of breaking some sitemaps, and since it's more or less clear that we're going to require JDK 1.4 for 2.2, I'll probably propose to drop Jakarta ORO in favour of the JDK's package (unless it's seriously broken) ... travel light. IIRC, ORO is not used by sitemap. Rather, CForms has direct dependecies on ORO. PS I heard that 1.4.0 regexp was not good: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-regexp-userm=106588023307749w=2 Vadim
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Christoph Gaffga wrote: The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. but what about the maximum support JDK? I tried to compile with 1.5beta, but it didn't work. I don't think didn't work gives us enough info on how to fix it :-) So I compiled with 1.4 and let it run with 1.5. The gc ist much better with 1.5! Of course, we should try to work on all the upper versions as well... as long as it's our fault and not theirs, though. -- Stefano. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Regexps (was Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2)
Vadim Gritsenko wrote: IIRC, ORO is not used by sitemap. Rather, CForms has direct dependecies on ORO. Might be worthwile checking if 1.4 regexps are good enough for the task. PS I heard that 1.4.0 regexp was not good: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-regexp-userm=106588023307749w=2 Oh, well, since 1.4.1 fixes most bugs, we can mandate 1.4.1 or even 1.4.2 ;-). Ugo
Stream vs Mapped IO (was Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2)
Has anyone else read Bruce Eckel's Thinking in Java ?
quote (chapter 12)
Although the performance of old stream I/O has been improved by
implementing it with nio, mapped file access tends to be dramatically
faster.
/quote
So by switching to 1.4 and *not* using NIO you're likely to get a speed
bump already.
However switching to mapped file access (as was suggested before using
memory mapped files) from traditional stream IO would gain the most
significant increase.
quote
Stream Write: 1719
Mapped Write: 359
Stream Read: 750
Mapped Read: 125
Stream Read/Write: 5188
Mapped Read/Write: 16
/quote
I am getting similar results over various runs. The test program is
attached (needs the test harness classes to run, but you can see what
he's doing)
The third edition including code samples is freely available from
http://mindview.net/Books/DownloadSites
I hope this helps making the decision 1.4 vs 1.3. I also started a poll
on the userlist to get a feeling of what the installed userbase is using
at the moment. I'll gather some stats and report back.
Regards
Jorg
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
Hi:
Many was talked about this topic. I think it not need a large explanation:
The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the
next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but
seems like few people is using it.
Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2?
Here is my +1
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
//: c12:MappedIO.java
// {Clean: temp.tmp}
// From 'Thinking in Java, 3rd ed.' (c) Bruce Eckel 2002
// www.BruceEckel.com. See copyright notice in CopyRight.txt.
import java.io.*;
import java.nio.*;
import java.nio.channels.*;
public class MappedIO {
private static int numOfInts = 400;
private static int numOfUbuffInts = 20;
private abstract static class Tester {
private String name;
public Tester(String name) { this.name = name; }
public long runTest() {
System.out.print(name + : );
try {
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
test();
long endTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
return (endTime - startTime);
} catch (IOException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
public abstract void test() throws IOException;
}
private static Tester[] tests = {
new Tester(Stream Write) {
public void test() throws IOException {
DataOutputStream dos = new DataOutputStream(
new BufferedOutputStream(
new FileOutputStream(new File(temp.tmp;
for(int i = 0; i numOfInts; i++)
dos.writeInt(i);
dos.close();
}
},
new Tester(Mapped Write) {
public void test() throws IOException {
FileChannel fc =
new RandomAccessFile(temp.tmp, rw)
.getChannel();
IntBuffer ib = fc.map(
FileChannel.MapMode.READ_WRITE, 0, fc.size())
.asIntBuffer();
for(int i = 0; i numOfInts; i++)
ib.put(i);
fc.close();
}
},
new Tester(Stream Read) {
public void test() throws IOException {
DataInputStream dis = new DataInputStream(
new BufferedInputStream(
new FileInputStream(temp.tmp)));
for(int i = 0; i numOfInts; i++)
dis.readInt();
dis.close();
}
},
new Tester(Mapped Read) {
public void test() throws IOException {
FileChannel fc = new FileInputStream(
new File(temp.tmp)).getChannel();
IntBuffer ib = fc.map(
FileChannel.MapMode.READ_ONLY, 0, fc.size())
.asIntBuffer();
while(ib.hasRemaining())
ib.get();
fc.close();
}
},
new Tester(Stream Read/Write) {
public void test() throws IOException {
RandomAccessFile raf = new RandomAccessFile(
new File(temp.tmp), rw);
raf.writeInt(1);
for(int i = 0; i numOfUbuffInts; i++) {
raf.seek(raf.length() - 4);
raf.writeInt(raf.readInt());
}
raf.close();
}
},
new Tester(Mapped Read/Write) {
public void test() throws IOException {
FileChannel fc = new RandomAccessFile(
new File(temp.tmp), rw).getChannel();
IntBuffer ib = fc.map(
FileChannel.MapMode.READ_WRITE, 0, fc.size())
.asIntBuffer();
ib.put(0);
for(int i = 1; i numOfUbuffInts; i++)
ib.put(ib.get(i - 1));
fc.close();
}
}
};
public static void main(String[] args) {
for(int i = 0; i tests.length; i++)
System.out.println(tests[i].runTest());
}
} ///:~
RE: Stream vs Mapped IO (was Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2)
I'm not against considering 1.4 for 2.2, but please have in mind that we have to maintain 2.1.x first which is JDK 1.3 based and we need a replacement for Jisp there. Carsten -Original Message- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jorg Heymans Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 9:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Stream vs Mapped IO (was Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2) Has anyone else read Bruce Eckel's Thinking in Java ? quote (chapter 12) Although the performance of old stream I/O has been improved by implementing it with nio, mapped file access tends to be dramatically faster. /quote So by switching to 1.4 and *not* using NIO you're likely to get a speed bump already. However switching to mapped file access (as was suggested before using memory mapped files) from traditional stream IO would gain the most significant increase. quote Stream Write: 1719 Mapped Write: 359 Stream Read: 750 Mapped Read: 125 Stream Read/Write: 5188 Mapped Read/Write: 16 /quote I am getting similar results over various runs. The test program is attached (needs the test harness classes to run, but you can see what he's doing) The third edition including code samples is freely available from http://mindview.net/Books/DownloadSites I hope this helps making the decision 1.4 vs 1.3. I also started a poll on the userlist to get a feeling of what the installed userbase is using at the moment. I'll gather some stats and report back. Regards Jorg Antonio Gallardo wrote: Hi: Many was talked about this topic. I think it not need a large explanation: The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Geoff Howard wrote: Ugo Cei wrote: Antonio Gallardo wrote: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 -0.5 Even though 1.4 is available for most platforms, and I've been using it exclusively for quite a long time, I still think there are many environments where people are forced to use 1.3 (not to mention 1.2) and upgrading wouldn't be an easy task. Does anyone here have any direct experience with such a situation? I am having a hard time imagining a case where a new development effort would be forced for technical reasons not to deploy on a newer backwards compatible jdk. Old 1.3 code will run (in some cases after recompilation), and old projects can still use whatever jvm version they need. But a new project based on a new version of Cocoon? Ok, a 2.1 project may want to upgrade but my experiences have shown upgrading jvm generally painless compared to upgrading Cocoon versions... Yes I have. But I think it's okay if 2.1 has JDK1.3 as minimum JVM and Cocoon 2.2 JDK1.4 because it will take some time until the 2.2 branch will be released and marked as stable. And I don't think that those organizations use unstable software ;-) -- Reinhard
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: Ugo Cei wrote: Unico Hommes wrote: I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo, this is chicken-egg problem: nobody is going to implement something on 1.4-only API if they aren't sure the community is going to accept it. We don't have to decide right now, but I think it would be good to give the signal please go ahead and experiment if you think it makes sense, we'll judge depending on the advantages. WDYT? Agreed. But, please, somebody, [POLL] our userbase first. Vadim
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Vadim Gritsenko dijo: Agreed. But, please, somebody, [POLL] our userbase first. There is already a pool. See the [POLL] in the user list. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
On 1 Mar 2004, at 08:33, Ugo Cei wrote: Antonio Gallardo wrote: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 -0.5 Even though 1.4 is available for most platforms, and I've been using it exclusively for quite a long time, I still think there are many environments where people are forced to use 1.3 (not to mention 1.2) and upgrading wouldn't be an easy task. If, and when, we have something that absolutely requires 1.4 (say, a new caching system based on NIO, like Pier suggested), we might reconsider this requirement. Doing it now would just alienate many users without really buying us anything important. I suggest to repeat this vote when we have a proposed time frame for the release of 2.2. I wanted for someone to pull out a vote on this one (not me) because I'm going to vote (as Ugo) -0.5 for the REQUIREMENT of Cocoon 2.2 to operate only on J2SDK = 1.4. Ok, don't get me wrong, I am the one who initially said it would be so cool, but I believe that for 2.2 we have much bigger fishes to fry. NIO is nice (indeed) for a bunch of things, and as Alan pointed out, using RegEx in the 2.2 sitemap would be a killer, but IMVHO for this release we have MUCH BIGGER fishes to fry: blocks and continuations. Continuations, well, easy... We're still running on a forked JavaScript interpreter, and personally I don't care much about any other language :-D And I started picking back on Avalon and family in the past few weeks to deploy some stuff, and yeah, it's a nice package, but I still don't understand the full complexity of why certain approaches (to my mind counterproductive) were chosen... IMVHO, 2.2 should be focused on the platform, blocks, compoents, continuations to a SOLID and STABLE implementation (did Stefano say few months ago that he felt like we were building sand?). I do feel that the Cocoon might somehow in some very limited case going off without solidifying its foundations, and this (2.2) is one good opportunity to put some solid concrete down there, EVERYWHERE... A cache based on NIO? Fine, if it's a block, I can swap it in at any time. RegEx for the sitemap? If matchers are pluggable, it's fairly easy. So, IMVHO, yes, 2.2 could be a requirement for some blocks, but someone (and not me :-) has to shake the foundations, and put some concrete where we need it... We'll have components based on 1.4, sure, but if we build our architecture pluggable enough, well, I don't see how that would impact people running 1.3. On 1 Mar 2004, at 18:37, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: We don't have to decide right now, but I think it would be good to give the signal please go ahead and experiment if you think it makes sense, we'll judge depending on the advantages. I'd say, let's keep 1.4 in mind in solidifying the foundations, and let's grasp those advantages we can get now out of it by deploying a modular architecture... The strict requirement can come later on, when we'll have to decouple cocoon from it's Connection/Thread paradigm and move the network stack away from the blocking model. Pier
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Pier Fumagalli wrote: using RegEx in the 2.2 sitemap would be a killer I thought we already had regexp in the sitemap. -- Stefano, puzzled smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Antonio Gallardo wrote: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 -0.5 Even though 1.4 is available for most platforms, and I've been using it exclusively for quite a long time, I still think there are many environments where people are forced to use 1.3 (not to mention 1.2) and upgrading wouldn't be an easy task. If, and when, we have something that absolutely requires 1.4 (say, a new caching system based on NIO, like Pier suggested), we might reconsider this requirement. Doing it now would just alienate many users without really buying us anything important. I suggest to repeat this vote when we have a proposed time frame for the release of 2.2. Ugo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Ugo Cei wrote: Antonio Gallardo wrote: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 -0.5 Even though 1.4 is available for most platforms, and I've been using it exclusively for quite a long time, I still think there are many environments where people are forced to use 1.3 (not to mention 1.2) and upgrading wouldn't be an easy task. If, and when, we have something that absolutely requires 1.4 (say, a new caching system based on NIO, like Pier suggested), we might reconsider this requirement. Doing it now would just alienate many users without really buying us anything important. I suggest to repeat this vote when we have a proposed time frame for the release of 2.2. This question should probably be asked on the users mail list. There are lots of government agencies that are way behind. Version 1.3 is their limit and maybe even 1.2 in some cases. We must be careful or we will exclude Cocoon from being used. Pity. --David
RE: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Antonio Gallardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] asks: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Yes, please: +1
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
* Hunsberger, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-01 16:57]: Antonio Gallardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] asks: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Yes, please: +1 Does this mean we can use 1.4 regex in the sitemap? -- Alan / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://engrm.com/ aim/yim: alanengrm - icq: 228631855 - msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
David Crossley wrote: Ugo Cei wrote: Antonio Gallardo wrote: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 -0.5 Even though 1.4 is available for most platforms, and I've been using it exclusively for quite a long time, I still think there are many environments where people are forced to use 1.3 (not to mention 1.2) and upgrading wouldn't be an easy task. If, and when, we have something that absolutely requires 1.4 (say, a new caching system based on NIO, like Pier suggested), we might reconsider this requirement. Doing it now would just alienate many users without really buying us anything important. I suggest to repeat this vote when we have a proposed time frame for the release of 2.2. This question should probably be asked on the users mail list. There are lots of government agencies that are way behind. Version 1.3 is their limit and maybe even 1.2 in some cases. I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. +1 for 1.4 Unico
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Unico Hommes wrote: I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Ugo Cei wrote: Unico Hommes wrote: I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo, this is chicken-egg problem: nobody is going to implement something on 1.4-only API if they aren't sure the community is going to accept it. We don't have to decide right now, but I think it would be good to give the signal please go ahead and experiment if you think it makes sense, we'll judge depending on the advantages. WDYT? -- Stefano. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
RE: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Ugo Cei [EMAIL PROTECTED] asks: Unico Hommes wrote: I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. It's sort of chicken and egg: why spend the time writing a NIO based persistent store if we have no guarantee that it can be used? I'd rather just give the developers the a-priori knowledge that what they write (that is 1.4 dependant) will be acceptable no matter what...
RE: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] write: Ugo Cei wrote: Unico Hommes wrote: I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo, this is chicken-egg problem: nobody is going to implement something on 1.4-only API if they aren't sure the community is going to accept it. LOL: apparently we are thinking completely along the same lines today. I just wrote egg-actly the same thing before I saw your response...
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
On Mon, 2004-03-01 at 04:41, Antonio Gallardo wrote: Hi: Many was talked about this topic. I think it not need a large explanation: The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 big +1 -- Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java XML Competence Support Center [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
On 01.03.2004 19:37, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: I think that as a software product that is known for its innovative nature it is *very* important in the interest of Cocoon to refuse being impaired by the immobility of bureaucracratic organisations. We are having a small crisis on our hands ATM regarding our persistent store component and if I was reading Pier correctly he was willing to dedicate some time towards a solution to this problem. One of the main attractions of the jdk 1.4 is its NIO package, and it's supposed to be a major improvement in Javas IO performance. With 1.4 being available for - what more than two years? - and 1.5 already on the horizon it is IMHO the right time to upgrade. Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo, this is chicken-egg problem: nobody is going to implement something on 1.4-only API if they aren't sure the community is going to accept it. We don't have to decide right now, but I think it would be good to give the signal please go ahead and experiment if you think it makes sense, we'll judge depending on the advantages. WDYT? I'm with Ugo: If there is no need to force the users to 1.4 I'm against it (e.g. there was an issue about a different exception constructor not available in 1.3). But if someone provides a really useful 1.4 thing like the mentioned NIO-based implementation of the persistent store I'm for 1.4 of course. Joerg
RE: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
From: Joerg Heinicke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] But if someone provides a really useful 1.4 thing like the mentioned NIO-based implementation of the persistent store I'm for 1.4 of course. I'm more of a user than a developer of Cocoon, but I'd say that if someone can provide a reasonable argument that 1.4 would bring some useful things, I'd be for 1.4. I.e. no need to implement the NIO-based store, just some statement to the effect that it would bring performance benefits. (In this case, even with non-blocking NIO reads and writes, you'll still have to wait for the whole store.read() to finish, since the rest of the system isn't built around a non-blocking architecture. I therefore think that a NIO-based persistent store will not bring any significant performance boost without some serious re-architecting.) /LS
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: Ugo Cei wrote: Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo, this is chicken-egg problem: nobody is going to implement something on 1.4-only API if they aren't sure the community is going to accept it. We don't have to decide right now, but I think it would be good to give the signal please go ahead and experiment if you think it makes sense, we'll judge depending on the advantages. WDYT? This is exactly what I'm trying to say: Go ahead and experiment. When you have something to show, be certain that we won't require compatibility with 1.3 anymore, just for the sake of it. We'll judge depending on the advantages, when we have something to base our judgment on. This is why I voted -0.5 and not -1, not to pose a veto but to signify that we shouldn't abandon compatibility with 1.3 just because we might exploit some cool new feature of 1.4 someday. Anyway, if most committers want to switch to 1.4 _now_, I have nothing personally against it. I've been using 1.4 exclusively for more than I can remember and have recently aligned a bunch of applications to Cocoon 2.1.4, JDK 1.4.2 and Tomcat 5.0.18 (unfortunately 5.0.19 was released a couple of days later) and I plan to migrate some more in the coming weeks. Ugo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Ugo Cei wrote: Antonio Gallardo wrote: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 -0.5 Even though 1.4 is available for most platforms, and I've been using it exclusively for quite a long time, I still think there are many environments where people are forced to use 1.3 (not to mention 1.2) and upgrading wouldn't be an easy task. Does anyone here have any direct experience with such a situation? I am having a hard time imagining a case where a new development effort would be forced for technical reasons not to deploy on a newer backwards compatible jdk. Old 1.3 code will run (in some cases after recompilation), and old projects can still use whatever jvm version they need. But a new project based on a new version of Cocoon? Ok, a 2.1 project may want to upgrade but my experiences have shown upgrading jvm generally painless compared to upgrading Cocoon versions... Geoff If, and when, we have something that absolutely requires 1.4 (say, a new caching system based on NIO, like Pier suggested), we might reconsider this requirement. Doing it now would just alienate many users without really buying us anything important. I suggest to repeat this vote when we have a proposed time frame for the release of 2.2. Ugo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Alan dijo: * Hunsberger, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-03-01 16:57]: Antonio Gallardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] asks: Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Yes, please: +1 Does this mean we can use 1.4 regex in the sitemap? Hi Alan: Yes. This is the type of features we cannot use it right now. Also there are some blocks that silently only runs on 1.4. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Ugo Cei wrote: Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: Ugo Cei wrote: Since we don't have a NIO-based implementation of the persistent store, yet, why upgrade now? When we have it, I'll be more than willing to vote +1. Ugo, this is chicken-egg problem: nobody is going to implement something on 1.4-only API if they aren't sure the community is going to accept it. We don't have to decide right now, but I think it would be good to give the signal please go ahead and experiment if you think it makes sense, we'll judge depending on the advantages. WDYT? This is exactly what I'm trying to say: Go ahead and experiment. When you have something to show, be certain that we won't require compatibility with 1.3 anymore, just for the sake of it. We'll judge depending on the advantages, when we have something to base our judgment on. This is why I voted -0.5 and not -1, not to pose a veto but to signify that we shouldn't abandon compatibility with 1.3 just because we might exploit some cool new feature of 1.4 someday. Anyway, if most committers want to switch to 1.4 _now_, I have nothing personally against it. I've been using 1.4 exclusively for more than I can remember and have recently aligned a bunch of applications to Cocoon 2.1.4, JDK 1.4.2 and Tomcat 5.0.18 (unfortunately 5.0.19 was released a couple of days later) and I plan to migrate some more in the coming weeks. Great, seems like we have consensus then. -- Stefano. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
[VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Hi: Many was talked about this topic. I think it not need a large explanation: The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
Re: [VOTE] - Entry level JSDK 1.4 in Cocoon 2.2
Antonio Gallardo wrote: Hi: Many was talked about this topic. I think it not need a large explanation: The idea is to set JSDK 1.4 as the minimum supported JDK supported for the next major release 2.2 of Cocoon. Currently we are supporting also 1.3 but seems like few people is using it. Do you agree with JSDK 1.4 as the lower Java version supported in Cocoon 2.2? Here is my +1 +1 -- Stefano. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
