Mailing-List: contact dev-help@forrest.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 01:39:30 +1000
From: David Crossley <crossley@apache.org>
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Subject: Re: Questions about the release instructions
Message-ID: <20050609153930.GA26179@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
References: <1405250270.20050607161807@soethe.net>
 <42A5E9FD.6090204@apache.org> <20050608061909.GA23738@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <1596053190.20050608103204@soethe.net> <711862875.20050609172718@soethe.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <711862875.20050609172718@soethe.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> 
> Any comments on this proposal?

Yes i sent comments under another thread name:
"required Java version"
Would someone please follow up. It is a very important point.

--David

> Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> 
> > David Crossley wrote:
> 
> >>> >>- Set your Java version to be the lowest specified of our supported
> >>> >>versions.
> >>> >
> >>> >Where is the definitive info on the supported versions? The FAQ says
> >>> >we need Java 1.4 or better. Does that mean it has to be 1.4.0 or can
> >>> >it be 1.4.x
> >>> 
> >>> 1.4.0
> 
> >> Oooh, glad you asked that question. I was just going to use 1.4.1
> >> Last time i did not use 1.3.0 rather 1.3.1
> 
> > I think that we should test with 1.4 in its most current
> > fix-version and update our requirements to reflect that.
> 
> > If we test against 1.4.0 we might find bugs that result from bugs in
> > 1.4.0 and have been fixed in the more recent versions. And we might
> > not find bugs that have been introduced with these fixes.
> 
> > So we are hurting people that do what you should be doing (update your
> > java regularly to the latest fix version) to what end?
> 
> > --
> > Ferdinand Soethe