commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Proxy 1.0
Date Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:04:16 GMT
On 19/02/2008, James Carman <> wrote:
> On 2/19/08, sebb <> wrote:
> > > It's written to be 1.3 compliant.
> >
> > It appears to be so if one uses Maven, however I just tried it with
> > Eclipse, and there are some classes which are not compatible with 1.3.
> >
> > RuntimeException does not have RuntimeException([String,]Throwable)
> > constructors, nor  do Exception.getCause() String.matche(String) exist
> > in 1.3.
> Okay, so how about we say it's 1.4 compliant?  It's a brand new
> library, so there really are no existing users.  The ones I have are
> already using it based on what's in SVN, so they're probably okay with
> the 1.4edness (it's a word, I promise).  Should I update the POM to
> override what we have in the parent?

Your choice - you could either rework to make it compliant with 1.3,
or update the POM to 1.4.

> This brings up an interesting
> question, though.  Why isn't this flagged?  I said it's supposed to be
> 1.3 compliant to maven.  Shouldn't the maven build fail if I've got
> stuff in there that's not 1.3 compliant?

The compiler version flags don't affect the run-time library that is used.
I don't know if there are plans to fix this.

The build would fail if the source used a newer syntax (such as
generics), but otherwise it does nothing as far as I know. The target
version just affects the class version.

See this comment from Simon Kitching:

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message