incubator-yoko-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sakala, Adinarayana" <ASAK...@iona.com>
Subject RE: coding standard and logging
Date Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:15:06 GMT
Alan,

when does geronimo move to JDK 1.5?
That said, i understand many current production deployments are on JDK 1.4 and majority of
them are moving to JDK 1.5.
Aren't we targetting new deployments.
If so, I think we must consider JDK 1.5 as it allows to build better Yoko than JDK 1.4.

I have to think little bit about your layering approach.

thanks,
Adi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:list@toolazydogs.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 12:24 PM
> To: yoko-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: coding standard and logging
> 
> 
> I think that we can layer this.  Core server compiles and runs under 
> JDK14.  Tooling, etc. compiles and runs under JDK15.
> 
> Let me be clear.  The overwhelming bulk of production 
> deployments are in 
> JDK14.  We need to be sensitive to this.  You will need to 
> convince me 
> that any other route other than the compromise stated above 
> is a viable 
> option.
> 
> I do not like retrotranslators since, IIUC, they do not work well w/ 
> debuggers.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Alan
> 
> Sakala, Adinarayana wrote, On 4/6/2006 8:50 AM:
> 
> >Yes If we start JDK 1.5 you get all the rich features of JDK 
> 1.5 plus most projects/customers are moving in that direction.
> >For the part that "we will not support JDK 1.4" answer is 
> yes and no depending on how you look at it.
> >Yes, is we can use a retrotranslator to run in a JDK 1.4 
> environment. http://retrotranslator.sourceforge.net/
> >
> >My vote would be to start with JDK 1.5 as Aaron suggests in 
> this email. Writing code in JDK1.5 is so much different than 
> writing code in JDK 1.4 and then running it in 1.5.
> >
> >+1 to take the route of JDK 1.5 for Yoko.
> >
> >thanks,
> >Adi
> >
> >  
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:list@toolazydogs.com]
> >>Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 11:34 AM
> >>To: yoko-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>Subject: Re: coding standard and logging
> >>
> >>
> >>Nolan, Edell wrote, On 4/6/2006 8:19 AM:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:list@toolazydogs.com] 
> >>>Sent: 06 April 2006 16:07
> >>>To: yoko-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>Subject: Re: coding standard and logging
> >>>
> >>>Lars Kühne wrote, On 4/5/2006 9:30 PM:
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>Lars Kühne wrote, On 4/4/2006 4:05 PM:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Nolan, Edell wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>       
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>            
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>2) The last email for the logging - is below We could use
the 
> >>>>>>>LogUtils class from celtix which is using the
> >>>>>>>jdk1.5 logging.
> >>>>>>>         
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>              
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>I think there was strong opposition against JDK logging because

> >>>>>>people love log4j. I think the consensus was to define our own

> >>>>>>logger interface and inject that in ORB.init().
> >>>>>>       
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>            
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>What are our target JDK versions again?  Do we start w/ JDK14 or

> >>>>>JDK13?  I am of the opinion that we use the vanilla logger 
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>for JDK14 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>>or, if we start w/ JDK13, log4j.  In either case I do 
> not see the 
> >>>>>need for a specialized logger interface that's injected; I'm 
> >>>>>interested in hearing opinion on this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>JDK 1.3 will be end-of-lifed by Sun this summer, so I think 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>we should 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>ignore it.
> >>>>
> >>>>Re logging, where I work we use log4j on JDK 1.4. I think 
> that is a 
> >>>>pretty common scenario, and using vanilla j.u.logging will not 
> >>>>integrate well with the rest of our apps. If you want to 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>support both 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>you either have to use some logger abstraction, and a 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>logger interface 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>is the best abstraction I can come up with.
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>Makes sense.  What about slf4j?
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Re minimum JDK: I would like to also bring JDK 1.5 into the 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>picture, 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>but maybe that should go into another thread.
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>Yes, if our minimum JDK is 1.4 then I assume that we would 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>work under JDK1.5; er, at least if you don't use Geronimo as 
> >>an example.  :)
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Regards,
> >>>Alan.
> >>>
> >>>I seen on the geronimo dev list 
> >>>
> >>>"We already support JDK 1.5 except for CORBA.  Because of 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>the CORBA limitation Geronimo can't be certified on JDK 1.5, 
> >>but if you leave CORBA disabled (and turn off the DayTrader 
> >>sample application) Geronimo should run fine on 1.5.
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>   Aaron
> >>>"
> >>>
> >>>My vote is to start with jdk1.5 and it seems geronimo 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>already has support for jdk1.5.
> >>    
> >>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>When you say start w/ JDK 1.5, do you mean that we will not support 
> >>JDK1.4?  I am very much against that.
> >>
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>Alan
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message