directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Seelmann <m...@stefan-seelmann.de>
Subject Re: Concurrent classes in junit-addons
Date Tue, 08 Feb 2011 23:18:45 GMT
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2/8/11 5:59 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny<elecharny@apache.org>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2/8/11 1:43 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:40 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny<elecharny@gmail.com>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/8/11 10:32 AM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Stefan Seelmann<seelmann@apache.org>
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found something over at stackoverflow to define different compile
>>>>>>> versions for main and test code [4], I'll test that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously that won't work because JDK5 doesn't have a Java6 compiler.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what I would suggest is to copy the classes from [5] with the
>>>>>> original package names and license/copyright headers to our
>>>>>> junit-addons module. As the classes have the ALv2 license header
we
>>>>>> are safe to copy them. An advantage is that once we switch to Java6
we
>>>>>> can drop those classes and use the com.mycila:mycila-junit dependency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Go for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure we can drop Java 5 now, many users are still using it...
>>>>
>>>> One more reason why they should switch to Java 6. Java 5 is way slower.
>>>>
>>>> IMO we should not have to keep building for it. Java 7 is out. We're
>>>> supporting 6&    7.
>>>
>>> Frankly, I wish we can drop Java 5 completely, but I'm afraid it's still
>>> widely used in enterprises :
>>> http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=61645
>>>
>>> Even if this poll is not realistic, it says that 34% of the companies are
>>> still using Java 5 :/ :
>>> "Question four: At work, what JVM do you target compilation for?
>>>
>>> Java 6 won again, with 247 responses (58%); Java 1.4 got 33 (8%), Java 5
>>> got
>>> 146 (34%). One person said they used Retroweaver for clients with 1.4."
>>
>> I hear you. I'd rather focus on the majority. And soon this will
>> change. By the time we're out the door with a GA it's not going to be
>> a matter of contention.
>>
>> When hunting I always used to target slightly ahead of a running
>> animal. Why? Because I like killing bambi. Well you get my point ...
>>
>> It's no sweat off my back because I'm just not dealing with the
>> overhead of this. Thought it might spare others managing it some pain.
>
> All in all, switching to Java 6 is not *that* bad. i'm just wondering if the
> problem we have with the concurrent test tooling (which requires Java6)
> can't be workarounded by requiring the code to be compiled using Java 5 and
> run with Java 6.
>
> If not, then, well, let's go for Java 6

I think a test dependency (even when helpful by speeding up the build
and detecting concurrency issues) isn't worth that step.

I agree with Emmanuel that Java 5 or older is still used in companies
(just like in my current project). But I think Java 5 is mainly used
by commercial software like the fat application servers or ERP
software. If a company decides to use ApacheDS we can expect that they
know that there is something beyond Java 5.

My 2 cents,
Stefan

Mime
View raw message