mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julien Vermillard <jvermill...@archean.fr>
Subject Re: Moving to Java 5 and merging all subprojects into one big project.
Date Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:50:15 GMT
Le jeudi 26 octobre 2006 à 07:46 -0400, Alex Karasulu a écrit :
> Ersin Er wrote:
> > 0  Java5 migration
> > -1 Subprojects merging
> > 
> > MINA's current project structure seems almost perfect to me. It gives
> > you dependency granulalarity and provides Java5 support where needed.
> > I do not see a strong reason to do the both moves. But if Java 1.4 is
> > preventing MINA to support new features, Java5 move can be considered
> > more seriously.
> I was questioning the Java 5 move myself.
> However I think there are some real reasons why MINA should move in that 
> direction: concurrent libs, better performance with improved locking 
> constructs.  I think eventually we're going to have an even better MINA 
> with 1.5.
> We still have the 1.0 branch for those interested in sticking to 1.4.
> What I do recommend is that MINA jumps to version 1.5 instead of 1.1 to 
> give a cue to users that something big has changed.  A switch in JDK 
> versions is not a simple jump like the one from 0.9 to 1.0.  It's a bit 
> more serious than that.  You do want to give the users some kind of 
> hint.  When they see you have jumped from 1.0 to 1.5 they will ask why 
> at least internally and take a closer look to see the differences if not 
> directly ask on the list.
> If we bump MINA to 1.1 and unsuspecting users move to 1.1 they're going 
> to be surprised and perhaps a bit unhappy when they realize JDK 1.4 is 
> no longer supported.  Again they'll have to dig around or ask the ML but 
> in the end they're not going to be happy.
> In the end I think it's important to have some consistency in the way we 
> do versioning.  I know there are some loop holes but we'll be consistent 
> in showing that something big has happened by skipping a few minor 
> versions as did the Tomcat folks.
> Alex

i think you made a point here. Jumping to 1.5 or 2.0 is an idea. I'm
sure as a user I'll think 1.1 is nearly compatible with 1.0; but the API
greatly changed and JDK requirement too.


View raw message