struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Apache Wiki <wikidi...@apache.org>
Subject [Struts Wiki] Update of "RoughSpots" by GeorgeDinwiddie
Date Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:55:44 GMT
Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Struts Wiki" for change notification.

The following page has been changed by GeorgeDinwiddie:
http://wiki.apache.org/struts/RoughSpots

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    * [tfenne] I think you *have* to support JDK 1.5, and it should be the default. If it's
not too hard to provide 1.4 compatibility great, but I think all examples, defaults etc. should
leverage 1.5. Generics allow you to do much more for the user without asking for configuration
information. If a user wants to use JDK 1.5 enums, it should work, etc. etc. If it's extra
work on the user's part to make 1.5 features work, simplicity goes out the window.
    * [frankz] I think this is one of those things to be really careful about the perception
people may form.  If Action1 is going to continue to develop and be supported, even if to
a lesser degree, then forcing 1.5 for Action2 is probably fine.  However, I know at my company,
we are stuck on 1.4, and won't be changing for a long time.  I also know that we are not unique
in this regard.  If we can't move to Action2. so long as Action1 is still around and being
supported, that's fine.  But if we can't move to Action2 and it even '''seems''' like Action1
isn't getting enough attention, that wouldn't look so good to us.  Ultimately, if both can
be supported, I think that is still the best answer.  I definitely think the points made about
moving to 1.5 are totally valid, but I think that may lock out a lot of people who might otherwise
use Action2, so if that can be avoided, so much the better.
    * [crazybob] Someone made the point earlier on that if a company is hesitant to switch
to JDK 1.5, they'll probably be hesitant to adopt SAF2, too. With a little time, 1.4 will
become irrelevant. I'm fine with supporting 1.4, but 1.5 should be the priority, and we shouldn't
let 1.4 support negatively impact design decisions.
+    * [gdinwiddie] WRT "if a company is hesitant to switch to JDK 1.5, they'll probably be
hesitant to adopt SAF2, too," I don't think that's necessarily true.  In companies where I've
worked, the choice of what libraries are used for app development are often made by the developers
of that app, but choice of app server (which dictates JDK version), is generally made at a
higher level, and often by a slow-moving committee.
  

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


Mime
View raw message