You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to batik-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> on 2007/10/15 12:30:32 UTC
[POLL:RESULTS] User poll on Java version requirements
Dear Apache XML Graphics Batik/FOP/Commons users,
the user poll is now closed and the results are available on the
following Wiki page:
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007
Thanks a lot to all who took the time to fill out the survey. Based on
the results we can say that it's safe to drop support for Java 1.3 on
future versions. If we're going to skip directly to Java 1.5 needs some
more discussion among the project team. The results here are not as
clear. The discussion and decision making will happen on
general@xmlgraphics.apache.org if anyone (non-committers welcome, too!)
is interested.
Thanks,
Jeremias Maerki
On 08.10.2007 09:48:11 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Dear Apache XML Graphics Batik/FOP/Commons users,
>
> as you probably know, all products of the Apache XML Graphics project are
> still compatible with Java 1.3. We are currently discussing about
> dropping support for Java 1.3 and instead make Java 1.4 the minimum Java
> version required to run new releases. There was some talk about going
> directly for Java 1.5, too. The main reason: Maintaining support for
> Java 1.3 has become increasingly cumbersome which can become a problem
> in a mostly volunteer-based environment.
>
> Now, in order to minimize the number of people we upset with such a
> change, we would like to know what our users work with and what you
> think about this change. We've set up an online survey which we kindly
> ask you to fill out. It should not take much longer than 5 minutes.
>
> Please click here to start the survey:
> http://www.eSurveysPro.com/Survey.aspx?id=e3155c33-540e-471d-a23e-f6c1f73c8bd2
> (the survey ends on Sunday, October 14, 2007)
>
> Please note: Even if we change the minimum Java versions for new
> releases, the previous releases with Java 1.3 support will remain
> available for download.
>
> Thanks a lot!
> Jeremias Maerki
> (for the Apache XML Graphics devs)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: batik-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
That's the logical consequence, isn't it? Updating Checkstyle is totally
independent of that, of course, but certainly no opposition from me here.
Jeremias Maerki
On 19.10.2007 21:34:55 J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > No reactions so far.
>
> Oops!
>
> > Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> > opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment
>
> Yessssss! Does this also mean dropping the src/java-1.3
> directory and assorted build.xml stuff?
>
> [If we are at this, what about the checkstyle 3.5 support?]
>
> J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
Retroweaver [1] is probably a more current tool. Sun's is from 2001, I
think. But still, if we change to 1.5 within a year anyway, it's
probably not worth going through that learning-curve. You still have to
make sure you don't use any new features from the 1.5 class-library. And
there are a few nice things to be found there.
[1] http://retroweaver.sourceforge.net/
Jeremias Maerki
On 19.10.2007 14:56:18 Max Berger wrote:
> Dear XMLGraphics Dev,
>
> another option (although the acutal usability will have to be tested) is
> to require the generics/enum/autoboxing precompiler, which is available
> at:
>
> http://java.sun.com/developer/earlyAccess/adding_generics/
>
> and produces 1.3 and 1.4 compatible class files.
>
> Max
>
> Am Freitag, den 19.10.2007, 11:08 +0100 schrieb Vincent Hennebert:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> > > On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:16, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > >
> > >> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> > >> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> > >> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> > >> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
> > >>
> > >> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> > >> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
> > >
> > > Not as far as I'm concerned. +1 for staying with 1.4 for the time being.
> > >
> > > Chris is right. We don't really /need/ 1.5 to implement new features. It
> > > would be more a convenience than a necessity, so has very low priority IMO.
> > > Should anyone feel compelled to use 1.5, he could always integrate it
> > > much in the same way the 1.3-1.4 gap has been dealt with (separate build
> > > targets to be able to build on both versions without too much hassle).
> >
> > AFAIK you can’t produce 1.4-compatible bytecode if the source code has
> > the new features introduced in 1.5 (annotations, generics, type-safe
> > enums). So that would be nearly useless to maintain separate branches,
> > as the 1.5 one would only allow to use classes from the standard library
> > which aren’t available in 1.4. And we can actually live without those
> > classes.
> >
> > Granted, 1.5 features are more a convenience than a necessity, but they
> > are so much more convenient...
> >
> > Ok, I’m repeating myself, shutting up now.
> > Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Max Berger <ma...@berger.name>.
Dear XMLGraphics Dev,
another option (although the acutal usability will have to be tested) is
to require the generics/enum/autoboxing precompiler, which is available
at:
http://java.sun.com/developer/earlyAccess/adding_generics/
and produces 1.3 and 1.4 compatible class files.
Max
Am Freitag, den 19.10.2007, 11:08 +0100 schrieb Vincent Hennebert:
> Hi,
>
> Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> > On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:16, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >
> >> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> >> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> >> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> >> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
> >>
> >> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> >> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
> >
> > Not as far as I'm concerned. +1 for staying with 1.4 for the time being.
> >
> > Chris is right. We don't really /need/ 1.5 to implement new features. It
> > would be more a convenience than a necessity, so has very low priority IMO.
> > Should anyone feel compelled to use 1.5, he could always integrate it
> > much in the same way the 1.3-1.4 gap has been dealt with (separate build
> > targets to be able to build on both versions without too much hassle).
>
> AFAIK you can’t produce 1.4-compatible bytecode if the source code has
> the new features introduced in 1.5 (annotations, generics, type-safe
> enums). So that would be nearly useless to maintain separate branches,
> as the 1.5 one would only allow to use classes from the standard library
> which aren’t available in 1.4. And we can actually live without those
> classes.
>
> Granted, 1.5 features are more a convenience than a necessity, but they
> are so much more convenient...
>
> Ok, I’m repeating myself, shutting up now.
> Vincent
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Vincent Hennebert <vi...@anyware-tech.com>.
Hi,
Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:16, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
>> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
>> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
>> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
>> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>>
>> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
>> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
>
> Not as far as I'm concerned. +1 for staying with 1.4 for the time being.
>
> Chris is right. We don't really /need/ 1.5 to implement new features. It
> would be more a convenience than a necessity, so has very low priority IMO.
> Should anyone feel compelled to use 1.5, he could always integrate it
> much in the same way the 1.3-1.4 gap has been dealt with (separate build
> targets to be able to build on both versions without too much hassle).
AFAIK you can’t produce 1.4-compatible bytecode if the source code has
the new features introduced in 1.5 (annotations, generics, type-safe
enums). So that would be nearly useless to maintain separate branches,
as the 1.5 one would only allow to use classes from the standard library
which aren’t available in 1.4. And we can actually live without those
classes.
Granted, 1.5 features are more a convenience than a necessity, but they
are so much more convenient...
Ok, I’m repeating myself, shutting up now.
Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Andreas L Delmelle <a_...@pandora.be>.
On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:16, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
Not as far as I'm concerned. +1 for staying with 1.4 for the time being.
Chris is right. We don't really /need/ 1.5 to implement new features.
It would be more a convenience than a necessity, so has very low
priority IMO.
Should anyone feel compelled to use 1.5, he could always integrate it
much in the same way the 1.3-1.4 gap has been dealt with (separate
build targets to be able to build on both versions without too much
hassle).
Cheers
Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by The Web Maestro <th...@gmail.com>.
On 10/17/07, Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
>
> Jeremias Maerki
Java 1.4 seems the safer bet. Anyone who needs pre-1.4 can use 0.20.5
or 0.93 (or pre-0.94). I see the logic in maintaining support for 1.4
until Sun completes the End of Life process for it.
We may want consider explicitly stating when we plan to drop support
for JDK 1.4 in our road map (e.g., fop-1.0--or whatever version--will
be the last planned release of FOP to support JDK 1.4).
BTW Max, thanks for the analysis of systems. It might be nice to do a
similar survey of JDK versio support for FOP, that we could add to our
FAQ.
--
Regards,
The Web Maestro
--
<th...@gmail.com> - <http://homepage.mac.com/webmaestro/>
My religion is simple. My religion is kindness.
- HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Adrian Cumiskey <ad...@gmail.com>.
For as long as Sun continue to support a version of Java I think that we should continue to try and
support it. So I'd just drop 1.3 and go with 1.4 for now.
Adrian.
Chris Bowditch wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
>> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
>> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
>> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
>> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> I agree. I don't want Java 1.4 dropped yet because of the type of
> environments where FOP will typically be used, i.e. Batch Processing
> environments which are often old mainframes, e.g. AS/400, or other older
> and less popular Unix flavours. Most of these older environments simply
> cannot be upgraded to newer JDKs and by excluding them we are making
> people either stay on older releases of FOP or losing potential users.
> Neither scenario sits well with me, and I fail to see the real benefit
> that generics gives us. I can still implement new functionality without
> them, no?
>
> <snip/>
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
Chris Bowditch schrieb:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
>> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
>> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
>> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
>> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> I agree. I don't want Java 1.4 dropped yet because of the type of
> environments where FOP will typically be used, i.e. Batch Processing
> environments which are often old mainframes, e.g. AS/400, or other older
> and less popular Unix flavours. Most of these older environments simply
> cannot be upgraded to newer JDKs and by excluding them we are making
We're using FOP on some AS/400s - but still version 0.20.5 ;-)
Anyway, +1 for switching to Java 1.4 now.
--
Christian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Chris Bowditch <bo...@hotmail.com>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
I agree. I don't want Java 1.4 dropped yet because of the type of
environments where FOP will typically be used, i.e. Batch Processing
environments which are often old mainframes, e.g. AS/400, or other older
and less popular Unix flavours. Most of these older environments simply
cannot be upgraded to newer JDKs and by excluding them we are making
people either stay on older releases of FOP or losing potential users.
Neither scenario sits well with me, and I fail to see the real benefit
that generics gives us. I can still implement new functionality without
them, no?
<snip/>
Chris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Vincent Hennebert <vi...@anyware-tech.com>.
Hi Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki a écrit :
> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
Were I to vote, I’d vote for 1.5, but it seems I’d be the only one... So
I would be ok with sticking to 1.4 for the next release, and then switch
to 1.5.
And generics /are/ definitely life-changing :-P
<snip/>
Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Max Berger <ma...@berger.name>.
Dear XMLGraphics Devs,
Jeuclid is at 1.5, because generics andnums make programming much
easier, and annotations make it safer.
However: I've encountered different environments where 1.4 runs stable,
and 1.5 is an addon / does not work properly.
Examples:
OpenBSD (1.4 runs very well, 1.5 still crashes every once in a while)
OS X (1.4 was the default on 10.4 installations, 1.5 needs to be
installed / configured separately)
Linux / Sparc ( There is no "Sun" JDK 1.5, and the latest one is
blackdowns 1.4 )
GCJ: There is partiall support for 1.5, but i've had real problems
getting it to work stable.
All this will change once OpenJDK and / or IcedTea becomes available and
works properly.
my 2 cts.
Max
Am Mittwoch, den 17.10.2007, 10:16 +0200 schrieb Jeremias Maerki:
> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
>
> On 15.10.2007 12:30:32 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Dear Apache XML Graphics Batik/FOP/Commons users,
> >
> > the user poll is now closed and the results are available on the
> > following Wiki page:
> >
> > http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007
> >
> > Thanks a lot to all who took the time to fill out the survey. Based on
> > the results we can say that it's safe to drop support for Java 1.3 on
> > future versions. If we're going to skip directly to Java 1.5 needs some
> > more discussion among the project team. The results here are not as
> > clear. The discussion and decision making will happen on
> > general@xmlgraphics.apache.org if anyone (non-committers welcome, too!)
> > is interested.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeremias Maerki
> >
> >
> >
> > On 08.10.2007 09:48:11 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > > Dear Apache XML Graphics Batik/FOP/Commons users,
> > >
> > > as you probably know, all products of the Apache XML Graphics project are
> > > still compatible with Java 1.3. We are currently discussing about
> > > dropping support for Java 1.3 and instead make Java 1.4 the minimum Java
> > > version required to run new releases. There was some talk about going
> > > directly for Java 1.5, too. The main reason: Maintaining support for
> > > Java 1.3 has become increasingly cumbersome which can become a problem
> > > in a mostly volunteer-based environment.
> > >
> > > Now, in order to minimize the number of people we upset with such a
> > > change, we would like to know what our users work with and what you
> > > think about this change. We've set up an online survey which we kindly
> > > ask you to fill out. It should not take much longer than 5 minutes.
> > >
> > > Please click here to start the survey:
> > > http://www.eSurveysPro.com/Survey.aspx?id=e3155c33-540e-471d-a23e-f6c1f73c8bd2
> > > (the survey ends on Sunday, October 14, 2007)
> > >
> > > Please note: Even if we change the minimum Java versions for new
> > > releases, the previous releases with Java 1.3 support will remain
> > > available for download.
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot!
> > > Jeremias Maerki
> > > (for the Apache XML Graphics devs)
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Cameron McCormack <ca...@mcc.id.au>.
Jeremias Maerki:
> No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
> next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
> but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
>
> Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
> decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
Agreed. Much as I’d like to move to 1.5, it seems moving to 1.4 is the
safer option. And it’s not like going from 1.3 -> 1.4 -> 1.5 will take
much more effort than 1.3 -> 1.5.
--
Cameron McCormack, http://mcc.id.au/
xmpp:heycam@jabber.org ▪ ICQ 26955922 ▪ MSN cam@mcc.id.au
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by "J.Pietschmann" <pi...@databaar.ch>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> No reactions so far.
Oops!
> Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
> opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment
Yessssss! Does this also mean dropping the src/java-1.3
directory and assorted build.xml stuff?
[If we are at this, what about the checkstyle 3.5 support?]
J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Going for 1.4 or 1.5 as minimum Java version?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch>.
No reactions so far. Interesting. Anyway, based on the user poll, my
opinion is to go for Java 1.4 for the moment and reevaluate Java 1.5
next summer. I mean I'd love to use generics and java.util.concurrent
but I think it is just a bit too soon to drop 1.4.
Any objections to that course of action? Should we have a majority
decision on whether 1.4 or 1.5 should be the new minimal Java level?
Jeremias Maerki
On 15.10.2007 12:30:32 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Dear Apache XML Graphics Batik/FOP/Commons users,
>
> the user poll is now closed and the results are available on the
> following Wiki page:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007
>
> Thanks a lot to all who took the time to fill out the survey. Based on
> the results we can say that it's safe to drop support for Java 1.3 on
> future versions. If we're going to skip directly to Java 1.5 needs some
> more discussion among the project team. The results here are not as
> clear. The discussion and decision making will happen on
> general@xmlgraphics.apache.org if anyone (non-committers welcome, too!)
> is interested.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremias Maerki
>
>
>
> On 08.10.2007 09:48:11 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Dear Apache XML Graphics Batik/FOP/Commons users,
> >
> > as you probably know, all products of the Apache XML Graphics project are
> > still compatible with Java 1.3. We are currently discussing about
> > dropping support for Java 1.3 and instead make Java 1.4 the minimum Java
> > version required to run new releases. There was some talk about going
> > directly for Java 1.5, too. The main reason: Maintaining support for
> > Java 1.3 has become increasingly cumbersome which can become a problem
> > in a mostly volunteer-based environment.
> >
> > Now, in order to minimize the number of people we upset with such a
> > change, we would like to know what our users work with and what you
> > think about this change. We've set up an online survey which we kindly
> > ask you to fill out. It should not take much longer than 5 minutes.
> >
> > Please click here to start the survey:
> > http://www.eSurveysPro.com/Survey.aspx?id=e3155c33-540e-471d-a23e-f6c1f73c8bd2
> > (the survey ends on Sunday, October 14, 2007)
> >
> > Please note: Even if we change the minimum Java versions for new
> > releases, the previous releases with Java 1.3 support will remain
> > available for download.
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> > Jeremias Maerki
> > (for the Apache XML Graphics devs)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org