: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-28] ServiceProvider
If we wanted to try it later that's fine.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 02:41, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
We could try to use retro-translate to produce java5 compatible artifacts
later?
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From
Porter lightguard...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-28] ServiceProvider
If we wanted to try it later that's fine.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 02:41, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
We
Message -
From: Jakob Korherr jakob.korh...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-28] ServiceProvider
-1 for supporting Java5
Let Microsoft deal with the legacy stuff ^^
Regards,
Jakob
We could try to use retro-translate to produce java5 compatible artifacts later?
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Jason Porter lightguard...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 4:45 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 4:45 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-28] ServiceProvider
We have it in Seam, and Weld for that Java 5 support, but I'd prefer to
stay on 6+. We *could* do a version compiled for jdk5. But then we get
: Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 9:41 PM
Subject: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-28] ServiceProvider
hi @ all,
fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
[2] is the implementation used in owb. i suggest to start
We have it in Seam, and Weld for that Java 5 support, but I'd prefer to
stay on 6+. We *could* do a version compiled for jdk5. But then we get into
issues of which branch, making sure it's all Java 5 features, etc.
-0.5
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 04:45, José Rodolfo Freitas
hi @ all,
fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
[2] is the implementation used in owb. i suggest to start with it (instead
of the version of codi), because the version of codi provides additional
mechanisms we might need later on (if we include the corresponding
features).
the basic concept:
+1
regards,
gerhard
2011/12/21 Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
hi @ all,
fyi: please check [1] before you answer.
[2] is the implementation used in owb. i suggest to start with it (instead
of the version of codi), because the version of codi provides additional
mechanisms
