Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID;
  b=iNIoZ9naRjC8Xpy+6On0+NCQBmwWwaJTa75suKPYOVbZPpOeDr10F/5QXVaIE8NtNcGIwDd2YnduSM5H4Fy5EtvWNxf4+dPIibGC2EOLarqrKcbyMOcYOieCMKAONViV6tJqRohYJyHWtzWzHnXLacPrIk+O+S/zkl4sUmrSdvg=;
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodnetic@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: The JDK 1.5 Can o' Worms
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <37820.9616.qm@web50312.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

I like the plan.=0A=0AOtis=0A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .=
 . . . . . . .=0ASimpy -- http://www.simpy.com/  -  Tag  -  Search  -  Shar=
e=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache=
.org>=0ATo: java-dev@lucene.apache.org=0ASent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:17=
:11 PM=0ASubject: The JDK 1.5 Can o' Worms=0A=0AWell, it has been over a ye=
ar since we have had the 1.5 debate (see  =0Ahttp://www.gossamer-threads.co=
m/lists/lucene/java-dev/35972? =0Asearch_string=3DJava%201.5;#35972) and I =
think it is time we start  =0Aaccepting 1.5 code. Nutch, Solr, Hadoop all u=
se JDK 1.5 and I imagine  =0ATika will as well (and no, I wouldn't jump off=
 the bridge if everyone  =0Aelse did, but this is not the same.)=0A=0AAt a =
deeper level, I find it frustrating to have to dig into methods  =0Aand cod=
e that use Collections in order to figure out what is actually  =0Ain the C=
ollection, thus I want generics.  I want to use StringBuilder  =0Ainstead o=
f StringBuffer.  I think we could benefit from some of the  =0Aconcurrency =
stuff in 1.5 as well.  I also believe all committers and  =0Aall contributo=
rs are using 1.5 already for there environment.  I  =0Awould also _guess_ t=
he large majority of our users are on 1.5.   Now,  =0AI know, it isn't a bi=
g deal to run 1.4 code in 1.5, but it is  =0Aannoying for development and t=
hat is a big enough motivator for me.=0A=0AI would propose we do the follow=
ing:=0A1.  Put in any new deprecations we want, cleanups, etc.=0A2. Release=
 2.9 so all of Mike M's goodness is available to 1.4  =0Ausers.  We could d=
o 2.4 and then 2.9 so that there are two more  =0Aiterations at 1.4 if peop=
le want a little more lead out time.    =0AStill, I think the turnaround on=
 these should be weeks, not months.   =0AThat is, 2.4 is the last significa=
nt 2.x release, 2.9 is a bug fix  =0Aand cleanup release and then we move o=
n.=0A3. Announce that 2.9 will be the last version under JDK 1.4=0A4. Switc=
h 3.0-dev to be on JDK 1.5, removing any deprecated code.=0A5. Start accept=
ing 1.5 patches on 3.0-dev=0A=0ANow, I think if there is someone who is rea=
lly in dire need of 1.4 we  =0Acould work to give one or two people committ=
er rights (after the  =0Aappropriate process has been undertaken, i.e. patc=
hing, interest,  =0Aetc.) on the 2.9 branch and they can be responsible for=
 back-porting.=0A=0AI'm not calling for a vote at this time, but I probably=
 will after  =0Asome discussion.=0A=0ACheers,=0AGrant=0A=0A----------------=
-----------------------------------------------------=0ATo unsubscribe, e-m=
ail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org=0AFor additional commands, e-ma=
il: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org=0A=0A=0A=0A

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