On 3/11/06, peter royal <proyal@apache.org> wrote:
On Mar 10, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Trustin Lee wrote:

On 3/11/06, Alex Karasulu <aok123@bellsouth.net> wrote:
(a) MINA sticks to 1.4 support without messing with byte code and
experiments with retroweaver.  She should release a 1.0 and have a solid
stable API for 1.4 and 1.5 support.  At this point I'd like to see mina
graduate incubation and start a new branch 1.1 which focuses on JDK1.5
with mina 1.0 as 1.4 fall back.  This can occur in about 4-6 months IMHO.

If MINA is released with 1.4 and 1.5 support not using retrotranslator, we have to maintain two branches for one release.  Do you mean it?  I have done it before with other projects and it was a real overhead.

I think Alex means that Mina 1.0 wouldn't use any 1.5-specific features.

If so, it's fine. :)

BTW it is very strange that nobody responses to my messages about retrotranslator (not retroweaver).  I want to listen to any reason behind all other people's opinions with respect to my opinion.

I'm fine with retrotranslater, but only because I wouldn't be using it in any production systems :) I totally understand the concerns of people about using bytecode modification in production systems.

I think it doesn't have much difference from AOP or runtime bytecode generation which is used by modern frameworks such as Hibernate and Springframework.  So I guess it is just because we didn't experience retrotranslator enough.  Considering its internal translation mechanism, it is almost 1-to-1 translation via a translation dictionary, which should be quite safe.

what we call human nature is actually human habit
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41  4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4  455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6