jakarta-jcs-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niall Gallagher <ni...@switchfire.com>
Subject Re: New Release w/o util.concurrent library?
Date Wed, 04 Apr 2007 12:09:01 GMT
It would be useful to have a poll to see what platforms people are
running JCS on.

I understand some companies will be running JDK 1.3. However I'd imagine
a majority are running JDK 5.
I'd also be interested in knowing what operating systems people are
running JCS on.

Here, we are running JCS on JDK 5, on Red Hat & Fedora Linux.

We have recently discovered some bugs in JCS' use of networking APIs
which breaks out-of-the-box compatibility with Red Hat and Fedora Linux.
We have fixed the bugs in an in-house modified version of the JCS -- but
the fixes require JDK 1.4 at least.
[ http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4665037 -- requires
java.net.NetworkInterface ]

We are interested in contributing the relevant patches to the JCS trunk,
however we can't do so because they are not compatible with JDK 1.3.

There is no workaround to the networking bugs on Linux that I'm aware of
using only JDK 1.3 APIs, without detrimentally changing network config
in the OS. Therefore I can't see JCS becoming compatible with Red Hat
Linux unless it migrates to a newer version of the JDK.

The Java JDK 1.3 was released 7 years ago. Personally, I'd like JCS
migrated to JDK 5. As Al said earlier, the JDK 1.3 branch will always
exist.

Can we have a show of hands - on which Operating Systems and JDK
versions are people running JCS?

Niall

On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 11:41 +0200, Al Forbes wrote:

> Maybe we can get some roadmap and dates from Aaron so that a few more
> people can help with this task.
> 
> The jdk1.3 compliant branch will always exist. Any major bugs can be
> backports to this branch for the folks still using jdk1.3.
> 
> Move to the back ported concurrent library (See
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCS-13)
> 
> I guess many people will probably move directly from jdk1.3 to jdk1.5,
> so in the distant future it should be easy to move from the backported
> classes to the native implementation.
> 
> Al.
> 
> On 04/04/07, Jon Barber <jbarber@lastminute.com> wrote:
> > Exactly. There are many large companies that will be using JDK 1.4 or
> > earlier for some time.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Taylor [mailto:james@jamestaylor.org]
> > Sent: 04 April 2007 05:05
> > To: JCS Users List
> > Subject: Re: New Release w/o util.concurrent library?
> >
> > Maybe you should look at how the pieces JCS uses from ***.concurrent and
> > determine whether the improvements to those pieces justify breaking
> > compatibility with older releases of the JVM that some people are still
> > running...
> >
> > (Hint: they don't)
> >
> > On Apr 3, 2007, at 11:53 PM, Eric Everman wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >> J2SE5 package java.util.concurrent includes improved, more efficient,
> >
> > >> standardized versions of the main components in this package. Please
> > >> plan to convert your applications to use them.
> > >
> > > Isn't it time to move on?
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jcs-users-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: jcs-users-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: jcs-users-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: jcs-users-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: jcs-users-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: jcs-users-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 


____________________________________
Niall Gallagher
                
Senior Developer / Architect 
Switchfire Ltd. 
phone: 
              + 44 (0)20 7798 2807  
fax: 
              + 44 (0)20 7798 2801  
email: 
               niall@switchfire.com 
web: 
                 www.switchfire.com 

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message