Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 54145 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2006 03:55:10 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2006 03:55:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 46945 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2006 03:55:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 46903 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2006 03:55:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 46892 invoked by uid 99); 7 Mar 2006 03:55:08 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:55:08 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of nrhope@gmail.com designates 64.233.166.180 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.166.180] (HELO pproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.166.180) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:55:08 -0800 Received: by pproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i49so912427pyi for ; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:54:47 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=lkIljVkAAUaHCgKRv4rXHAPsOj0jG9cTKce5Cc/YEpR143tqWCfQGQ9FIi5g24OrA6F3fWE8CEX2IRQKDlcmiucb7Iy4X7uqUTYqDNLgkfaQgWEsgrAvl5LjHGjVMcRKKoQzqHAWGPzKPbizaRKJYIw+hOaYovUiWdvgs5Tym44= Received: by 10.65.126.5 with SMTP id d5mr3031193qbn; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:54:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.203.10 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:54:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 14:54:47 +1100 From: "Norbet Reilly" To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Subject: Re: Shall we go JDK 1.5 in 1.1 branch In-Reply-To: <440CF872.7010206@bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <440CF872.7010206@bellsouth.net> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Not that it neccessarily concerns you guys, but the biggest problem we have re JDK version upgrades is IBM's websphere appserver which always seems to lag far behind due to having its own IBM-authored JVM. Our customers aren't keen to upgrade until websphere has, which ties our ha= nds. I gather that pretty much all new work will be going into AD 1.1 after a month or so, correct?