Mailing-List: contact dev-help@clerezza.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@clerezza.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of donnervogelistaken@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.160.49 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: donnervogelistaken@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEWfVJ=b9p1Ek3_z_7pLhOk0iy-Y4pxAdrNxt8rOvRpmN05iTA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CALvhUEXr9VGyx-awdPoS-R-zFNbxjc4sPbdjQCBt+=Axx1eXrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA7LAO3qeNArWXtE0Q34-Fd2cwnZBd1hgo4jUAaojw-bq-AghQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEWfVJ=b9p1Ek3_z_7pLhOk0iy-Y4pxAdrNxt8rOvRpmN05iTA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Daniel Spicar <daniel.spicar@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 15:38:51 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAHpa1C_T3ic2hd7HZNDwPfEjPpk1DfV88vBMpgQjSH17+V09wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Staying java 6 compatible?
To: dev@clerezza.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b10cd95a2228904d848119d

--047d7b10cd95a2228904d848119d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Personally I don't care what is used but I think it is smarter to wait
before requiring Java 7. The security concern is not a valid argument IMHO
because the security is a matter of the JVM and not the code. If you are
concerned you can run Java 6 code in a maintained JVM (openjdk or a java 7
one).

2013/3/19 Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org>

> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Rupert Westenthaler
> <rupert.westenthaler@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...Apache Stanbol is compatible to Java 6 something that would no longer
> > be possible if Clerezza would require Java 7. I would prefer to stay
> > with Java 6 unless their is a really important reason...
>
> +1, IMO it's a bit early to abandon Java 6 and I don't see compelling
> reasons.
>
> -Bertrand
>

--047d7b10cd95a2228904d848119d--