commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: [VFS] Minimum Java version
Date Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:53:10 GMT

On Aug 19, 2009, at 9:22 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Niall Pemberton []
>> 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< 
>> >
>> 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.


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

View raw message