Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 599CE9CAC for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 29864 invoked by uid 500); 12 Feb 2012 21:52:56 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 29791 invoked by uid 500); 12 Feb 2012 21:52:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 29781 invoked by uid 99); 12 Feb 2012 21:52:55 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:52:55 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [98.138.91.190] (HELO nm30-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com) (98.138.91.190) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:52:49 +0000 Received: from [98.138.90.56] by nm30.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Feb 2012 21:52:28 -0000 Received: from [98.138.84.34] by tm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Feb 2012 21:52:28 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Feb 2012 21:52:28 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 42972.42616.bm@smtp102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: m45HcDMVM1k4gNpv7Ni4f8feKGedtyFAT3BtlZzHfHyvhBy VJA2mqGxpviPiLQjC3zq3zniEgZ4HyfG0l6TWr9VeoPHZ86hMBQmxel4K7gx sXaSiok6WgLxKDonam3lyTAgS8euEzxw34O9oA1HogUxLI6p.glKnUBx317f CO7kq0vHYomuJATinpQZtGnfehNBwGdgiBkPJ4Q8c.huZEK3E.VMuMnU3ajI mfZXcnk_1h.DVtiZasvKhO5nqLbATpa_7cFD_JLKsvOFCdy0BuDN5nRdul4T gDq8SFtmEEtS86Ntxq57NZbQn2KJahS_8uGBVGGdX0AvpYOeJMCY.9BthSfg bMbXRtExhKPLrNci8LVKzJ4LdlcKEon0Vtn9BNRxC8vdkJNwh10r7HamaMxC lLgi2dGtpatKhoWWzVOUEk8zIJ5BWpTKPJr3vR6ChQsa9z08uWW4sQUf8R.Z pjUqzVF3lK1rhqPMa_7SIgyCxgt1mXLwle5QgpmOjk1otHZtQgUd6uElshHs Yk1P6NDsh9zx6GY3O3vM3wiVeFIyYqeTcetWDUPqw8YvBxIrbCNhC_MbSU8A LA7DJ.R5TC6FEDYDf.u6x6qMLivP3vNqQqOXwK.O_Ro0MdQZfzjCSVLsS0L9 fh3P3kKy4BZLE3QXUzxritp7136WNlVrqiIphTS.Y0DwdczS20GU3E8Aq X-Yahoo-SMTP: xcjD0guswBAZaPPIbxpWwLcp9Unf Received: from [192.168.10.101] (pfg@200.118.157.7 with plain) by smtp102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Feb 2012 13:52:27 -0800 PST Message-ID: <4F38349A.6090301@apache.org> Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:52:26 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111227 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [code] (stax-api) Anyone still uses Java 5? References: <1329017023.88350.YahooMailClassic@web113518.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4F37C4D9.9020007@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <4F37C4D9.9020007@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/12/12 08:55, Carl Marcum wrote: > On 02/11/2012 10:23 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> Hi; >> >> We currently carry an old version(1.0) of StAX-api that is >> under copyleft. This library is supposed to be needed by >> Saxon-B but we don't really use this library because >> is now part of OpenJDK 1.6 and upper so we only need it >> when trying to use an old version of Java and we are not >> using the system-saxon. >> >> The latest version of this library (1.2) is now under >> Apache License 2: >> >> http://stax.codehaus.org/ >> >> I started to update it but I can't really test it: >> deinstalling jdk6 to bring back jdk5 and rebuild >> everything is not exactly fun ;). >> >> Anyone wants to play a bit with a patch? Alternatively >> we could just leave things as they are and drop >> StaX out of the distribution after 3.4-Release. >> >> Pedro. >> >> > > +1 on dropping Java 5. > > The only reason I could see to keep Java 5 would be to not break users > programs or a due to a platform we wish to support that could not use > Java 6. > > I checked Oracle's compatibility page for Java SE 5 to 6 [1] and > virtually all programs that were built on 5 will run on 6. > > I am even running Java 6 on a Win 2000 instance I keep for testing. > Supported platforms for Java 6 [2]. > > [1] > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-137541.html > > [2] > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/system-configurations-135212.html > > Best regards, > Carl Some of the Java stuff that we carry was actually developed with Java 4 so I am rather surprised that everything seems to work! I committed an update to the StaX API as revision 1243337; since it is only used for older versions of Java it's doubtful anyone will notice any difference. FWIW, the instructions to use the binary version were outdated and it seems all other Apache projects decided to abandon the old StaX version we had in the repository: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XMLBEANS-308 cheers, Pedro.