Re: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support
I have just committed the appropriate changes for this task to trunk, please comment if you run into any problems. On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Eric Dalquist wrote: > Sounds good to me though I would vote for not even bothering with the caveat > and just be clear about it. uPortal 3.2 will only compile and run on JDK6 > would be the official message. > > I've created http://www.ja-sig.org/issues/browse/UP-2551 and some subtasks. > Anyone here should feel free to take those on and get the changes made, the > help would be appreciated. > > -Eric > > > > Cris J Holdorph wrote: >> >> How do people feel about JDK support and uPortal? >> >> Sun has dropped support for JDK 5 back in October. We have the next major >> release of uPortal, 3.2, coming out as a release candidate shortly. >> Recently a bug was introduced by some code that only built with JDK 6. >> >> Is it worth considering only supporting JDK 6 with uPortal 3.2? With some >> caveat, that it *might* run on JDK 5, but developers are not committed to >> compiling/running/testing against JDK 5. >> >> If we do NOT consider the above then we need to know what we're >> telling ourselves. To avoid the issue that Adam introduced, we must >> actually USE JDK 5, to build against, because just using JDK 6 in "compile >> for java 5" mode, doesn't eliminate the prossibility of being compile time >> dependent on a JDK class difference. >> >> My personal preference would be to no longer officially support JDK 5, now >> that Sun is no longer officially supporting it. >> >> Cris J H >> >> > -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
Re: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support
Sounds good to me though I would vote for not even bothering with the caveat and just be clear about it. uPortal 3.2 will only compile and run on JDK6 would be the official message. I've created http://www.ja-sig.org/issues/browse/UP-2551 and some subtasks. Anyone here should feel free to take those on and get the changes made, the help would be appreciated. -Eric Cris J Holdorph wrote: How do people feel about JDK support and uPortal? Sun has dropped support for JDK 5 back in October. We have the next major release of uPortal, 3.2, coming out as a release candidate shortly. Recently a bug was introduced by some code that only built with JDK 6. Is it worth considering only supporting JDK 6 with uPortal 3.2? With some caveat, that it *might* run on JDK 5, but developers are not committed to compiling/running/testing against JDK 5. If we do NOT consider the above then we need to know what we're telling ourselves. To avoid the issue that Adam introduced, we must actually USE JDK 5, to build against, because just using JDK 6 in "compile for java 5" mode, doesn't eliminate the prossibility of being compile time dependent on a JDK class difference. My personal preference would be to no longer officially support JDK 5, now that Sun is no longer officially supporting it. Cris J H smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support
+1 - Original Message - From: "Eric Domazlicky" To: uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 3:55:29 PM GMT -07:00 U.S. Mountain Time (Arizona) Subject: RE: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support Dropping JDK 5 support makes sense to me. -Original Message- From: bounce-8723186-20145...@lists.wisc.edu [mailto:bounce-8723186-20145...@lists.wisc.edu] On Behalf Of Cris J Holdorph Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 2:18 PM To: uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org Subject: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support How do people feel about JDK support and uPortal? Sun has dropped support for JDK 5 back in October. We have the next major release of uPortal, 3.2, coming out as a release candidate shortly. Recently a bug was introduced by some code that only built with JDK 6. Is it worth considering only supporting JDK 6 with uPortal 3.2? With some caveat, that it *might* run on JDK 5, but developers are not committed to compiling/running/testing against JDK 5. If we do NOT consider the above then we need to know what we're telling ourselves. To avoid the issue that Adam introduced, we must actually USE JDK 5, to build against, because just using JDK 6 in "compile for java 5" mode, doesn't eliminate the prossibility of being compile time dependent on a JDK class difference. My personal preference would be to no longer officially support JDK 5, now that Sun is no longer officially supporting it. Cris J H -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: edomazli...@tacomacc.edu To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: lful...@unicon.net To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
RE: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support
Dropping JDK 5 support makes sense to me. -Original Message- From: bounce-8723186-20145...@lists.wisc.edu [mailto:bounce-8723186-20145...@lists.wisc.edu] On Behalf Of Cris J Holdorph Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 2:18 PM To: uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org Subject: [uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support How do people feel about JDK support and uPortal? Sun has dropped support for JDK 5 back in October. We have the next major release of uPortal, 3.2, coming out as a release candidate shortly. Recently a bug was introduced by some code that only built with JDK 6. Is it worth considering only supporting JDK 6 with uPortal 3.2? With some caveat, that it *might* run on JDK 5, but developers are not committed to compiling/running/testing against JDK 5. If we do NOT consider the above then we need to know what we're telling ourselves. To avoid the issue that Adam introduced, we must actually USE JDK 5, to build against, because just using JDK 6 in "compile for java 5" mode, doesn't eliminate the prossibility of being compile time dependent on a JDK class difference. My personal preference would be to no longer officially support JDK 5, now that Sun is no longer officially supporting it. Cris J H -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: edomazli...@tacomacc.edu To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
[uportal-dev] uPortal and JDK support
How do people feel about JDK support and uPortal? Sun has dropped support for JDK 5 back in October. We have the next major release of uPortal, 3.2, coming out as a release candidate shortly. Recently a bug was introduced by some code that only built with JDK 6. Is it worth considering only supporting JDK 6 with uPortal 3.2? With some caveat, that it *might* run on JDK 5, but developers are not committed to compiling/running/testing against JDK 5. If we do NOT consider the above then we need to know what we're telling ourselves. To avoid the issue that Adam introduced, we must actually USE JDK 5, to build against, because just using JDK 6 in "compile for java 5" mode, doesn't eliminate the prossibility of being compile time dependent on a JDK class difference. My personal preference would be to no longer officially support JDK 5, now that Sun is no longer officially supporting it. Cris J H -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
