You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> on 2013/03/05 16:04:47 UTC
[fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Hi all guys,
since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
recently involved other commons component.
Any objection?
TIA,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 5 March 2013 16:43, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1. Why not Java 6 since 5 is mostly dead.
1.5 is not totally dead, so why exclude those users who still have Java 1.5?
If there is some feature of 1.6 that would make a big difference to
the performance/functionality then it night be OK, but there is no
point requiring Java 6 otherwise.
> Gary
>
> On Mar 5, 2013, at 10:05, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all guys,
>>
>> since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
>> recently involved other commons component.
>>
>> Any objection?
>> TIA,
>> -Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
+1. Why not Java 6 since 5 is mostly dead.
Gary
On Mar 5, 2013, at 10:05, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all guys,
>
> since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
> recently involved other commons component.
>
> Any objection?
> TIA,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
Hallo Jörg!
>> Sounds great.
>>
>> But please, keep in mind to take care of the package export version:
>> Currently the API is exported at 1.2.1 being the same as the
>> bundle/library version. If you update the library/bundle to 2.0, make sure
>> the API export is *not* updated to 2.0, otherwise consumers in OSGi
>> environments will not be able to use (due to semantic versioning). Thanks.
>
> sorry, I don't understand your comment at all. If we use 2.0, it will not be
> binary compatible and we intent on purpose that this version is not used as
> automated replacement.
IIUC Felix comment, while we break binary compatibility, APIs are
still backward compatible, that is why the if the artifact binary
distribution bumps to 2.0.0 doesn't necessarily mean that package
bumps to it as well.
But I could be wrong :P So I'll let Felix give more details.
Alles Gute!
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 5 March 2013 18:57, KONTRA, Gergely <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Felix,
>>
>> Felix Meschberger wrote:
>>
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Sounds great.
>> >
>> > But please, keep in mind to take care of the package export version:
>> > Currently the API is exported at 1.2.1 being the same as the
>> > bundle/library version. If you update the library/bundle to 2.0, make
>> sure
>> > the API export is *not* updated to 2.0, otherwise consumers in OSGi
>> > environments will not be able to use (due to semantic versioning).
>> Thanks.
>>
>> sorry, I don't understand your comment at all. If we use 2.0, it will not
>> be
>> binary compatible and we intent on purpose that this version is not used as
>> automated replacement.
>>
>> - Jörg
>>
> If this is not intended for automated replacement, than why couldn't we
> replace silently the return type of getContentLength method from int to
> long?
That would break binary compatibility.
In which case we need to change the Maven coords and the package name
to avoid classpath problems - unless we are sure that no user software
uses the method whose API has changed. It's OK to break strict binary
compat. for internal methods/classes, but otherwise the package and
Maven changes are required.
Of course that is more trouble for users, so we try to maintain
compat. if possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by "KONTRA, Gergely" <pi...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Felix,
>
> Felix Meschberger wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Sounds great.
> >
> > But please, keep in mind to take care of the package export version:
> > Currently the API is exported at 1.2.1 being the same as the
> > bundle/library version. If you update the library/bundle to 2.0, make
> sure
> > the API export is *not* updated to 2.0, otherwise consumers in OSGi
> > environments will not be able to use (due to semantic versioning).
> Thanks.
>
> sorry, I don't understand your comment at all. If we use 2.0, it will not
> be
> binary compatible and we intent on purpose that this version is not used as
> automated replacement.
>
> - Jörg
>
If this is not intended for automated replacement, than why couldn't we
replace silently the return type of getContentLength method from int to
long?
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de>.
Hi Felix,
Felix Meschberger wrote:
> Hi
>
> Sounds great.
>
> But please, keep in mind to take care of the package export version:
> Currently the API is exported at 1.2.1 being the same as the
> bundle/library version. If you update the library/bundle to 2.0, make sure
> the API export is *not* updated to 2.0, otherwise consumers in OSGi
> environments will not be able to use (due to semantic versioning). Thanks.
sorry, I don't understand your comment at all. If we use 2.0, it will not be
binary compatible and we intent on purpose that this version is not used as
automated replacement.
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to
2.0.0
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@adobe.com>.
Hi
Sounds great.
But please, keep in mind to take care of the package export version: Currently the API is exported at 1.2.1 being the same as the bundle/library version. If you update the library/bundle to 2.0, make sure the API export is *not* updated to 2.0, otherwise consumers in OSGi environments will not be able to use (due to semantic versioning). Thanks.
Regards
Felix
Am 05.03.2013 um 16:04 schrieb Simone Tripodi:
> Hi all guys,
>
> since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
> recently involved other commons component.
>
> Any objection?
> TIA,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
Felix Meschberger | Principal Scientist | Adobe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
> Why not 1.3 ?
>
> Or at least wait until you see how much is changed before deciding
> whether it deserves a point release or a minor release bump.
nice idea, let's keep 1.2.3 until something drives us on increasing
the minor version
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 5 March 2013 20:56, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks both Gary and Sebb,
>
>> It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
>> Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
>> though it is a bit of a jump.
>> Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
>
> what you said makes perfectly sense, 2.0.0 is not justified ATM, I
> just had in mind the [digester] case, which had to be an exception,
> once the [pool] case came back in my mind, it reminded me the right
> workflow.
>
> I don't have enough time to do a major rewrite, I am rolling back the
> version to 1.2.3 and do minor updates.
Why not 1.3 ?
Or at least wait until you see how much is changed before deciding
whether it deserves a point release or a minor release bump.
> Thanks again,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:35 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5 March 2013 19:57, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
>>>>> update and bugfix.
>>>>
>>>> So why the change to 2.0?
>>>
>>> I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
>>> introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
>>> digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
>>>
>>> Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
>>
>> AFAIK, it's not covered by the Commons conventions:
>>
>> http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html#Major_Releases
>>
>> I'm not against bumping to 2.0, but I'm not sure it's necessary here.
>>
>> Does a bump give the right impression to end users?
>>
>> It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
>> Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
>> though it is a bit of a jump.
>> Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
>>
>>> TIA,
>>> -Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Benedikt Ritter <be...@gmail.com>.
Am 05.03.2013 um 21:56 schrieb Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>:
> Thanks both Gary and Sebb,
>
>> It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
>> Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
>> though it is a bit of a jump.
>> Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
>
> what you said makes perfectly sense, 2.0.0 is not justified ATM, I
> just had in mind the [digester] case, which had to be an exception,
> once the [pool] case came back in my mind, it reminded me the right
> workflow.
>
> I don't have enough time to do a major rewrite, I am rolling back the
> version to 1.2.3 and do minor updates.
Sounds better to me too. A 2.0 should ne a major rework of the api, like what we are doing with beanutils2. At least that is what I would expect as a library user.
Benedikt
>
> Thanks again,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:35 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5 March 2013 19:57, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
>>>>> update and bugfix.
>>>>
>>>> So why the change to 2.0?
>>>
>>> I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
>>> introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
>>> digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
>>>
>>> Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
>>
>> AFAIK, it's not covered by the Commons conventions:
>>
>> http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html#Major_Releases
>>
>> I'm not against bumping to 2.0, but I'm not sure it's necessary here.
>>
>> Does a bump give the right impression to end users?
>>
>> It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
>> Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
>> though it is a bit of a jump.
>> Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
>>
>>> TIA,
>>> -Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
Thanks both Gary and Sebb,
> It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
> Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
> though it is a bit of a jump.
> Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
what you said makes perfectly sense, 2.0.0 is not justified ATM, I
just had in mind the [digester] case, which had to be an exception,
once the [pool] case came back in my mind, it reminded me the right
workflow.
I don't have enough time to do a major rewrite, I am rolling back the
version to 1.2.3 and do minor updates.
Thanks again,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 9:35 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 March 2013 19:57, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
>>>> update and bugfix.
>>>
>>> So why the change to 2.0?
>>
>> I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
>> introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
>> digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
>>
>> Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
>
> AFAIK, it's not covered by the Commons conventions:
>
> http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html#Major_Releases
>
> I'm not against bumping to 2.0, but I'm not sure it's necessary here.
>
> Does a bump give the right impression to end users?
>
> It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
> Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
> though it is a bit of a jump.
> Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
>
>> TIA,
>> -Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 5 March 2013 19:57, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
>>> update and bugfix.
>>
>> So why the change to 2.0?
>
> I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
> introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
> digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
>
> Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
AFAIK, it's not covered by the Commons conventions:
http://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html#Major_Releases
I'm not against bumping to 2.0, but I'm not sure it's necessary here.
Does a bump give the right impression to end users?
It seems very unlikely that anyone will still be running Java 1.3 or
Java 1.4, so the change to 1.5 is not likely to concern users, even
though it is a bit of a jump.
Is the addition of generics sufficiently significant?
> TIA,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>wrote:
> >>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
> >>> update and bugfix.
> >>
> >> So why the change to 2.0?
> >
> > I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
> > introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
> > digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
> >
> > Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
>
No, because of type erasure, you can add generics and be binary compatible.
>
> Uhm it just came in my mind that [pool] had a different case - @Gary,
> before I start digging in the mail archive, do you remember the
> discussion we had when just increasing the supported JDK version?
>
The discussion WRT [pool] was of the type 'don't do generics in 1.x because
2.0 is coming out real soon now, it's going to confuse users, no one's
going to support 1.x and 2.x', and so on.
Well, I'm sure glad I put the effort to do 1.6 with generics because there
is still no sign of Pool2 :(
Gary
>
> TIA!
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
>>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
>>> update and bugfix.
>>
>> So why the change to 2.0?
>
> I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
> introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
> digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
>
> Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
Uhm it just came in my mind that [pool] had a different case - @Gary,
before I start digging in the mail archive, do you remember the
discussion we had when just increasing the supported JDK version?
TIA!
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
>> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
>> update and bugfix.
>
> So why the change to 2.0?
I intend to add at least generics, where possible - in the past, the
introduction of generics in digester justified the update from
digester-1.8 to digester-2.0.
Is the generics introduction enough to justify the major bump?
TIA,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 5 March 2013 15:34, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
> update and bugfix.
So why the change to 2.0?
> best,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi all guys,
>>
>> since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
>> recently involved other commons component.
>>
>> Any objection?
>> TIA,
>> -Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
+1... jdk1.3...
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
> update and bugfix.
>
> best,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Hi all guys,
>>
>> since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
>> recently involved other commons component.
>>
>> Any objection?
>> TIA,
>> -Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [fileupload] drop JDK1.3 support, update to 1.5 and bump to 2.0.0
Posted by Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org>.
Just for the record: I don't intend to do a major rewrite ATM, just
update and bugfix.
best,
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Simone Tripodi <si...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all guys,
>
> since I need [fileupload] @work, I intend to do a major bump that
> recently involved other commons component.
>
> Any objection?
> TIA,
> -Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org