On Aug 19, 2009, at 9:22 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:40 AM
To: Commons Users List
Subject: Re: [VFS] Minimum Java version
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Ralph Goers<[email protected]
>
wrote:
The packages haven't been changed so far. But this would
definitely have
to
be considered whether we would want to take on the package renaming
right
now.
With IO there were only a couple of JDK 1.5 changes that would have
broken compatibility - so we didn't make those changes and therefore
haven't had to do a package re-name. If VFS decides to moved to JDK
1.5 I would suggest doing compatible changes first and then
creating a
list/patch of incompatible changes for review - then make the
decision
based on how desirable/major/minor those changes are.
That seems to complicate matters IMO. If we care about having v1 and
v2 co-exist in a Java 5 application, then the v2 packages must to be
renamed. So if that is what we want, let us just bite the bullet and
rename now.
I think the point Niall is making is valid. Currently the minimum JDK
version of 2.0 is 1.4. I would think to start with all we would change
would be the version variable in the pom and then take advantage of it
a few places internally. We haven't planned on doing anything that is
incompatible at this point.
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
