james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [server] Java 5, Spring And Phoenix
Date Sun, 02 Nov 2008 21:46:26 GMT
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Bernd Fondermann
<bernd.fondermann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:43, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
>> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
>>> i'm increasingly convinced that the 3.0 codebase contains some
>>> compelling reasons to upgrade. i think it's important to offer an
>>> upgrade path for existing installations including retaining 1.4 JVM
>>> support. this means preserving 1.4 compatibility in the API and
>>> library layers and in any functions that existing in james 2.
>>>
>>> i quite fancy experimenting with some stuff (for example OpenJPA) that
>>> requires java 5. IIRC there are already some optional modules which
>>> require a 1.5 JVM but i'd like to use a more regular system. i propose
>>> using module names to allow java5 in the function layer. for example,
>>> openjpa-java5 would act like openjpa-function but would only be
>>> compiled when a 1.5 JVM is used.
>>>
>>> any objections?
>>>
>>> going forward, this will result in the issue that - given the current
>>> build - new features would only be available atfer downloading the
>>> source and compiling with a 1.5 JVM. i would like to suggest the
>>> following long term strategy: we use the same module system but ship
>>> the phoenix built under 1.4 (without new features) and spring built
>>> under 1.5 (with the new features).
>>>
>>> opinions?
>>
>> IMHO this is an useless waste of time :-)
>> Let's drop Java 2 1.4 and declare java 5 as a requisite.
>>
>> Java 1.4 completed the EOL period 3 days ago: no one should seriusly use
>> java 2 1.4 in any internet exposed machine.
>> Unless we plan to include james in an applet or some old embedded device
>> (and I never read about this scenario in this lists) java 1.4
>> compatibility is useless.
>>
>> Java 5 runtime already provides "an upgrade path for existing
>> installations" by smoothly running java 2 v1.4 code. This is true
>> expecially if you think that JAMES is run in its own virtual machine and
>> is not a component to be run inside old application servers.
>>
>> Once we'll have a working java5 release *if* many users will ask for a
>> java 1.4 solution they can help us figuring it out using
>> retroweaver/translator.
>
> +1
> For a major release, upgrading the required Java version is ok.

seems like we have a reasonable consensus on upgrading the minimum
java version for 3.0 to 1.5

any objections?

- robert

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


Mime
View raw message