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)
Message-ID: <460A2931.406@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:37:05 +0100
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>
Organization: OSS Watch
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@forrest.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposed Java version 1.4 and FOR-765
References: <20070325125127.GC8546@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <20070327041648.GI8546@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
 <1175038982.21252.31.camel@cartman>
 <20070328024324.GP8546@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20070328024324.GP8546@igg.indexgeo.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

David Crossley wrote:
> Thorsten Scherler wrote:
>> David Crossley wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Proposed Java version to test this release is Java 1.4
> 
> Thanks for following up. This is something that
> we need to decide as part of the Release Plan.
> I see that people are already saying yes.
> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOR-765
>  "forrest war and classpath issues with Jetty"
> 
>> It seems if we make it 1.5 we could close above issue as won't fix.
>>
>> Why want we 1.4?

Because there are still a very large number of organisations that use 1.4

> My view is that we need more investigation of FOR-765.
> We need more people to test with different versions of
> Jetty/Apache Tomcat and Java 1.4 version.
> So far only me and i might have a bad Jetty config.
> 
> I reckon that we should stick with Java 1.4 unless
> we really need to use specific features of Java 5.
> No need to just cut off part of our audience.

+1

I think this is one that we should all try and fix. U'll try and find 
some time today to look at it.

Ross