Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 58DF57490 for ; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 23:51:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 62945 invoked by uid 500); 25 Dec 2011 23:51:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 62849 invoked by uid 500); 25 Dec 2011 23:51:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 62840 invoked by uid 99); 25 Dec 2011 23:51:31 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 23:51:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,STOX_REPLY_TYPE X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of billwbarker@verizon.net designates 206.46.173.5 as permitted sender) Received: from [206.46.173.5] (HELO vms173005pub.verizon.net) (206.46.173.5) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 23:51:22 +0000 Received: from BillPC ([unknown] [71.107.56.4]) by vms173005.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0LWS00MYTA8ZKE30@vms173005.mailsrvcs.net> for dev@commons.apache.org; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 17:51:00 -0600 (CST) Message-id: <401BCA722D1045DEB454C4B5BC09522F@BillPC> From: "Bill Barker" To: "Commons Developers List" References: <4EF20068.5070200@gmail.com> <-209817214533913095@unknownmsgid> <4EF2072E.7050403@gmail.com> <4EF21008.4020207@gmail.com> <4EF21F8E.5010204@apache.org> <4EF2261F.1050507@gmail.com> In-reply-to: Subject: Re: [pool] [POOL-208] Support Java 1.5 Generics in version 1.x. Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 15:50:54 -0800 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3538.513 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org -----Original Message----- From: Konstantin Kolinko Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2011 1:15 AM To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [pool] [POOL-208] Support Java 1.5 Generics in version 1.x. 2011/12/23 Christian Grobmeier : > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Phil Steitz > wrote: >> On 12/21/11 11:09 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> >>>> On 21/12/2011 16:57, Phil Steitz wrote: >>>>> On 12/21/11 9:41 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Phil Steitz >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> 1.5.x ships with tomcat and is used by lots of other production >>>>>>> applications. We need to maintain the ability to patch it. >>>>>> Tomcat 5.5 (the oldest stable version i can find) uses Java 5: >>>>>> http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-5.5-doc/setup.html >>>>>> >>>>>> This proposed release is binary compatible - they should not have any >>>>>> issue to upgrade, right? >>>>>> How long would you like to maintain the elder 1.5.x code without java >>>>>> 5 >>>> support? >>>>> At least until 2.0 is out and for some time after that. Asking >>>>> tomcat and others to upgrade twice makes no sense. I will let Mark >>>>> or other tc committers comment on that. >>>> Tomcat will continue to use 1.5.x since that is what DBCP uses. When >>>> 2.0.x is ready, trunk will switch to 2.0.x and the associated DBCP >>>> release. Depending on the results, the release branches (5.5.x, 6.0.x >>>> and 7.0.x) may follow. >>>> >>>> Tomcat is highly unlikely to use Pool 1.6.x >>>> >>> Which is quite fine with me. >>> >>> My goal is only to provide a version of pool-1 with generics that is as >>> least disruptive as possible. >> >> That is great for your own use, but what releasing it does is sets >> us up to support 3 versions. We are having a hard enough time just >> supporting one. When we release 2.0, we will have two release >> branches to maintain. The 1.5.x code itself is fairly stable, but >> 1.5 was pretty much a complete rewrite of the core code and I expect >> we will continue to get bug reports against this code. Maintaining >> two versions of it does not sound fun to me and I really think it is >> unwise to set ourselves up to try to do it. > > OK, sorry if I ask the same question in the same dumb way all the > time... but we have figured out 1.5 will be binary compatible with > 1.6. > We can't we then simply drop 1.5 and go forward with 1.6? > > So far i have see the reason: Tomcat 5.5 runs with jdk1.4.2. Is this > actually the reason we don't go forward? Because another project needs > the 1.5 series? > If this is the case, then the EOL of Tomcat 5.5 is the earliest EOL of > Pool 1.5. > > >I think Tomcat 5.5 can go with latest released version of pool 1.5, >taking it from archives. > >TC 5.5 is currently configured to use pool 1.5.5 (as opposed to later >1.5.6 or 1.5.7) [1], and I am not going to propose upgrade of that, >though other Tomcat committers can propose it. > >The only question might be if there are some critical bug fixes (and I >think you will be able to backport those). > >Also I wonder what changes are required in Gump configuration. > >[1] >http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/tc5.5.x/trunk/build/build.properties.default?view=markup#l178 > There isn't any change needed for Gump since TC 5.5 doesn't run tests there and doesn't have a compile time dependency on [pool]. > > This does mean pool can earliest go forward in September 2012: > http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-55-eol.html > > Just want to know. I ask this because I start to believe we should > introduce EOL dates for our components. > > On 1.6, question is if this series will be so time consuming as > expected. After all, 1.5 dev is at a minimum as understood it. It > should be easy for Gary to move the changes to 1.6 version, if he is > willing to care on that (nasty tongues tell me Git would help in this > case). > > If 1.6 is coming and this project does not support it, how can we > handle it? After all we are not working for the Tomcat project, we are > working for ourselves, and Gary needs a generic version. I would not > like to see him going and make up a github fork. People outside of > this project are already saying we are like dinosaurs (collections vs > guava). We should probably discuss how we can do this - probably Gary > could make some kind of "half official" release, a bit of an > "experimental" tagged one. One people do not rely upon, except they > know what they are doing. Probably a 1.5-extended version, like in > Lord of the Rings. > Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org