river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MICHAEL MCGRADY <mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com>
Subject Re: JVM version policy Was: Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-jdk1.5 #3
Date Fri, 03 Dec 2010 00:17:26 GMT
The status of Real Time Java is not a sentimental matter, but an instructive fact of Sun culture.
 

The first thing should be to see is where Java 1.6 might be a plus for River.  Can you list
these areas?  That would be very helpful.

MG


On Dec 2, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote:

> Well all sentimentality aside for JSR 1, I still stick with my earlier suggestion of:
> 
> I would encourage that as River moves along it's roadmap, once the namespace is changed
to org.apache.river, that River mandates 1.6 as a baseline. Migration guides and/or utilities
can be provided to assist in the transition from legacy Jini to River. 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Dennis
> 
> On Dec 2, 2010, at 545PM, MICHAEL MCGRADY wrote:
> 
>> If there is a way to move forward and keep River compatible with Java 1.5, that would
be ideal.  We obviously cannot just stand still even though Java RTS might for a time.  It
is hard to tell at this stage what is happening because of the Oracle purchase of Sun and
speculation is not a thing I like to do.  However, we do know that Java RTS is the first Java
Community Process, i.e. literally No. 1, and I cannot believe that Java would abandon this
effort to the dustbin of history.  That would not bode well for Java as a platform.  
>> 
>> MG
>> 
>> 
>> On Dec 2, 2010, at 2:00 PM, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>> 
>>> If you're fine with River 2.1.1 then you have a platform which you can move forward
with right? That release is baselined at Java 1.4.
>>> 
>>> As River moves forward with it's roadmap, changing the com.sun namespace to org.apache,
and possibly moving to Java 1.6, you would still have a platform (2.1.1) that you could use.
>>> 
>>> As RTJ (hopefully) moves forward with eventual 1.6+ interoperability at that
point you could move to River, including product changes to account for the namespace change
as well.
>>> 
>>> Does that suffice?
>>> 
>>> On Dec 2, 2010, at 337PM, MICHAEL MCGRADY wrote:
>>> 
>>>> More on this later, but I am certainly aware that River cannot stay stagnant
at Java 1.5.  We need to be realistic but the real-time Java is going to "hit" in the near
term, I think.  There might need to be options and tracks and whatever makes sense to River.
>>>> 
>>>> MG
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Dec 2, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2010, at 127PM, MICHAEL MCGRADY wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Perhaps this will help: on the generic question of going to Java
1.6, and my plea not to do it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/33475
>>>>> 
>>>>> Michael,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks for the link. You may also find more information here: http://java.sun.com/javase/technologies/realtime/faq.jsp
>>>>> 
>>>>> One thing on this topic that I am curious about is what Oracle's plan
is for RTJ. We certainly cant answer that in this forum. But... will they keep it? If so,
and if they are given a large enough business opportunity for it's use, will they move towards
supporting 1.6? While this is a very interesting and compelling technical use of River, is
it enough to prohibit River moving to 1.6 and beyond?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Just asking ...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dennis
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Michael McGrady
>>>> Chief Architect
>>>> Topia Technology, Inc.
>>>> Cel 1.253.720.3365
>>>> Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037
>>>> mmcgrady@topiatechnology.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Michael McGrady
>> Chief Architect
>> Topia Technology, Inc.
>> Cel 1.253.720.3365
>> Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037
>> mmcgrady@topiatechnology.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Michael McGrady
Chief Architect
Topia Technology, Inc.
Cel 1.253.720.3365
Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037
mmcgrady@topiatechnology.com


Mime
View raw message