On 3/11/06, peter royal <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:--
On Mar 10, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Trustin Lee wrote:
On 3/11/06, Alex Karasulu
(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.