Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 84957 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2007 20:07:37 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Apr 2007 20:07:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 54701 invoked by uid 500); 10 Apr 2007 20:07:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 54655 invoked by uid 500); 10 Apr 2007 20:07:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 54640 invoked by uid 99); 10 Apr 2007 20:07:41 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:07:41 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of jason.dillon@gmail.com designates 64.233.166.183 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.166.183] (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.183) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:07:34 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id f31so1381817pyh for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:07:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender; b=npLpriNwrzfT0aln32nHcBA9h3ZkRIQEkzvcniDvP+SL4uNhhkhifAxYqCrvMhJoJysiOdn22lvYOAF5KP9X8eweqQUvAtAh0P93LkwjJjd02QWiKQ7V4wWToAMt/8WhNLxWCjocO5gTG/X1O5YJmvlIxxqwX71nMwYRgR40lFs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender; b=ljuXEE7t3zfYDLs2A+POLZ+40o3NGfF0AsK7Ty831tQHaFvo33lgwj4klDr34Bk1T6i3aNuPBnQjis7gRTWywFervpgKSEloFIbbnMvzNZB78leGRGjpFb1ZNCIsfqkWMEzYJXxKE683wOZtvGizkofHdNrH45WhhprtFmBeuN8= Received: by 10.35.121.2 with SMTP id y2mr13840125pym.1176235633474; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:07:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?10.0.1.2? ( [24.7.69.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w67sm13726311pyg.2007.04.10.13.07.12; Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:07:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <74e15baa0704101155k8c45e02ye41d9aabc3060dd5@mail.gmail.com> References: <461B9C7C.3000309@apache.org> <74e15baa0704101155k8c45e02ye41d9aabc3060dd5@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Cc: dwoods@apache.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jason Dillon Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Should we re-enable the JVMCheck warning message for the 2.0 release? Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:07:09 -0700 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Sender: Jason Dillon X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Using a < 1.5 JVM is more likely to barf up a class version incompatibility... unless the bootstrap modules (and their libraries) are compiled to be compatible with 1.4, but I don't think that is worth trying to enforce. I don't see any point in adding this extra warning layer muck. --jason On Apr 10, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote: > I would think we'd need to check for Java < 1.5 more urgently than > Java > 1.5. > > Thanks, > Aaron > > On 4/10/07, Donald Woods wrote: >> Wanted to see what everyone's opinion was before I integrate the >> patch >> for G2759 - >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2759 >> >> which re-enables the JVMCheck code that we had in 1.1 to warn >> users if >> they try to run the server on a non-Java SE 5 JVM (like Java SE 6.) >> >> >> -Donald >> >>