RE: [vfs] JDK 1.5

2009-11-09 Thread Gary Gregory
 -Original Message-
 From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
 Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 23:34
 To: Commons Developers List
 Subject: Re: [vfs] JDK 1.5
 
 
 On Nov 8, 2009, at 10:24 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
 
  Guys,
 
  looking at Ralph's comment in
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-254
  I am questionning myself, if there's any reason why vfs 2.0 should
  still
  have JDK 1.4 as requirement and not JDK 1.5. VFS 2.0 will be a major
  release and JDK 1.7 is years away to be used for our conservative
  customers. Although we have still some maintenance support for JDK
  1.4-based apps, they're phasing out and we will definitely not update
  dependencies with major releases. Therefore I'd rather have a VFS
  with more
  modern API (generics) in 2.0 than an old-fashioned version 2.0
  based on
  JDK 1.4 especially if the major release means that API changes too
  much for
  a drop in replacement of 1.1. Thoughts ?
 
 
 
 Actually, there was a poll on the dev list in august and no one
 objected to moving to JDK 5.  I have no problem with changing the
 compile and target versions to Java 5 but I would really like to see
 2.0 released asap. I'm already using it in production and from
 comments I've seen I'm pretty sure others are as well. At this point I
 think it would be good to keep the changes on 2.0 to a minimum

If the upgrade to Java 5 does not introduce new issues, I say go for it.

 
 I made changes on the VFS281 branch that require Java 5 as the minimum
 version internally but doesn't break compatibility in any other way. I
 haven't merged that to trunk because I asked for feedback and got
 none.  At this point I'm prepared to go out with 2.0 without this and
 then consider adding it to whatever the next release is going to be.

I like the release early, release often XP mantra. If we can get a 2.1 with 
Java 5 support right behind 2.0, that would be OK with me too. The idea would 
be to release 2.0 and release 2.1 ASAP just to move development onto a more 
modern platform. 

Gary

 
 To me, the primary concern is getting 2.0 released and there are still
 a ton of Jira issues, many with patches, that I haven't had a chance
 to look at. I took a stab at applying some easy ones over the last few
 days, but there are some that deal with issues findbugs found that
 probably should be addressed.
 
 Ralph
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org



RE: [vfs] JDK 1.5

2009-11-08 Thread Mario Ivankovits

Hi!
 
 looking at Ralph's comment in
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-254
 I am questionning myself, if there's any reason why vfs 2.0 should
 still
 have JDK 1.4 as requirement and not JDK 1.5.

If it is just me, I'd be happy to drop 1.4 dependency - Past votes were 
declined. Probably the time is ripe now.

If it is worth to generify the API is another story - as Ralph pointed out, the 
next logical step for VFS is to support the upcomming JDK 1.7 file.spi stuff. 
That is also my view, and hopefully falls into times where I have more time 
left to spend for VFS again.
Having a complete new api I see no point putting efforts into generifying the 
current api.
If we discover that the JDK 1.7 api is too limiting thigs might change, though.

On the other hand, as the VFS api is today, generifying it might be a 
no-brainer ;-)
We event might manage to generify without changed the VFS api - keeping it 
backward compatible. 

Ciao,
Mario


RE: [vfs] JDK 1.5

2009-11-08 Thread Gary Gregory
 -Original Message-
 From: news [mailto:n...@ger.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Jörg Schaible
 Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 22:24
 To: dev@commons.apache.org
 Subject: [vfs] JDK 1.5
 
 Guys,
 
 looking at Ralph's comment in
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-254
 I am questionning myself, if there's any reason why vfs 2.0 should
 still
 have JDK 1.4 as requirement and not JDK 1.5. VFS 2.0 will be a major
 release and JDK 1.7 is years away to be used for our conservative
 customers. Although we have still some maintenance support for JDK
 1.4-based apps, they're phasing out and we will definitely not update
 dependencies with major releases. Therefore I'd rather have a VFS with
 more
 modern API (generics) in 2.0 than an old-fashioned version 2.0 based
 on
 JDK 1.4 especially if the major release means that API changes too much
 for
 a drop in replacement of 1.1. Thoughts ?

Yes, good idea, drop Java 1.4 in favor of at least 1.5.

Gary

 
 - Jörg
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org



Re: [vfs] JDK 1.5

2009-11-08 Thread Ralph Goers


On Nov 8, 2009, at 10:24 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote:


Guys,

looking at Ralph's comment in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-254
I am questionning myself, if there's any reason why vfs 2.0 should  
still

have JDK 1.4 as requirement and not JDK 1.5. VFS 2.0 will be a major
release and JDK 1.7 is years away to be used for our conservative
customers. Although we have still some maintenance support for JDK
1.4-based apps, they're phasing out and we will definitely not update
dependencies with major releases. Therefore I'd rather have a VFS  
with more
modern API (generics) in 2.0 than an old-fashioned version 2.0  
based on
JDK 1.4 especially if the major release means that API changes too  
much for

a drop in replacement of 1.1. Thoughts ?




Actually, there was a poll on the dev list in august and no one  
objected to moving to JDK 5.  I have no problem with changing the  
compile and target versions to Java 5 but I would really like to see  
2.0 released asap. I'm already using it in production and from  
comments I've seen I'm pretty sure others are as well. At this point I  
think it would be good to keep the changes on 2.0 to a minimum


I made changes on the VFS281 branch that require Java 5 as the minimum  
version internally but doesn't break compatibility in any other way. I  
haven't merged that to trunk because I asked for feedback and got  
none.  At this point I'm prepared to go out with 2.0 without this and  
then consider adding it to whatever the next release is going to be.


To me, the primary concern is getting 2.0 released and there are still  
a ton of Jira issues, many with patches, that I haven't had a chance  
to look at. I took a stab at applying some easy ones over the last few  
days, but there are some that deal with issues findbugs found that  
probably should be addressed.


Ralph
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org