Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
Message-ID: <447C7D34.9000401@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 13:13:24 -0400
From: DM Smith <dmsmith555@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene and Java 1.5
References: <E1Fl58L-0007ZS-Jt@elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
 <447C6882.30401@gmail.com>
 <9ABFD80C-5F1E-4BAD-AC60-EC5FCAD40BAC@ehatchersolutions.com>
In-Reply-To: <9ABFD80C-5F1E-4BAD-AC60-EC5FCAD40BAC@ehatchersolutions.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Erik Hatcher wrote:
> On May 30, 2006, at 11:45 AM, DM Smith wrote:
>> By stating that I needed to run on Mac OS 9, this also implies that I 
>> need to run on OSX prior to Tiger (10.4) which does not have Java 5 
>> and according to everything that I read, won't. OSX 10.3 does not 
>> seem like an unreasonable target platform for Lucene applications.
>
> for all such arguments, my take is (as a fervent Mac-head myself) that 
> we allow folks to innovate using whatever technical details they want 
> and let lucene evolve as the state of the art of languages changes.  
> there are always older versions of lucene that work quite well enough 
> on other versions of java, etc.  those that need to maintain back 
> compatibility should step forward to work on that as things evolve.
>
> certainly we are not suggesting that we go crazy using features of a 
> newer JDK "just because"... but if there is a performance advantage 
> then we have an obligation to pursue it.

I agree. But, there is a difference between the performance of a JDK and 
that of a JVM. We need to be certain that the JDK is required for the 
performance boost and not just the JVM before we pursue it.

>   for new development like the GData server, Solr, etc, we should be 
> loose and allow the creative individuals to do their own thing.  for 
> lucene core, we need compelling reasons to jump to a higher JDK 
> requirement.

Agreed. But, I have not heard one compelling argument for the JDK 5 for 
core. (JVM certainly)

>
>
> we will not hold up progress because of the few that don't upgrade 
> their macs when steve jobs waves his magic wand.

LOL! Thanks!
>
>     Erik - from a snazzy speedy MacBook Pro running OS X 10.4.6 and 
> not looking back.
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org