You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-user@james.apache.org by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> on 2003/07/03 07:27:47 UTC
Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone still
cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us know.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Danny Angus wrote:
> my 2c (as if you care!) is that James should stay with 1.3 until a
> particular new piece of code cannot be written without a higher version, or
> until a very significant improvement in performance is achieved through the
> adoption of a higher version.
>
> At that point I'd expect there to be a vote by comitters, and if the time is
> right it will be a landslide. Up 'till now we've pretty much allowed
> ourselves to be vetoed by even a single well explained reason to stay with
> 1.3, because there hasn't been an equally compelling case to upgrade.
Seems like there are enough people who want to stick with 1.3.
How about this... the next release of JavaMail (version 1.4 which
shouldn't be for many many months) will require 1.4. At that point we
can again discuss whether it's worth upgrading as this is probably a
pretty good justification to upgrade.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
>
> not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other
> applications...
my 2c (as if you care!) is that James should stay with 1.3 until a
particular new piece of code cannot be written without a higher version, or
until a very significant improvement in performance is achieved through the
adoption of a higher version.
At that point I'd expect there to be a vote by comitters, and if the time is
right it will be a landslide. Up 'till now we've pretty much allowed
ourselves to be vetoed by even a single well explained reason to stay with
1.3, because there hasn't been an equally compelling case to upgrade.
d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Oki DZ <ok...@pindad.com>.
On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 14:06, Randahl Fink Isaksen wrote:
> Since James is an open source project dependant on volunteer developers,
> and since 1.4 has many helpful features,
I'm thinking about the java.nio.*; if I recall correctly, the TCP port
can be monitored. It's not about open or closed, but how many bytes
also. I think that would make (a hypothetical) James monitor component
quite interesting; so, instead of just, say, having a message is being
sent or completely sent status, we can also have how many bytes have
been sent up till now.
Oki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Shal Jain <sh...@intertechsys.com>.
We're still using JDK 1.3.
The issue also arises for small companies (like ours) who are providing
solutions - where JAMES is a key component - to larger companiens. I agree
with Aaron's point of view.
-shal
Quoting Aaron Knauf <ak...@xtra.co.nz>:
> Unfortunately, those of us who work for large companies don't have the
> luxury of a viewpoint such as this. A company with a large IT
> infrastructure is often not as quick on its feet as we would like it to
> be. It can take years to upgrade to a new version of a software
> product, depending on how important the move is perceived to be by those
> at the top.
>
> As for running both JDK's on your servers, this is not as easy as it
> sounds. Yes, it is technically easy - but getting JDK 1.4 onto an HP-UX
> box means patching the OS to the recommended minimum level, which means
> re-testing everything on that box, which means taking down a production
> box, running all sorts of critical applications, for a good chunk of
> time. Not something that is easy to get past the network ops team.
>
> I think that the best approach for now is to do as Steve and Vincenzo
> suggest and aim to move to 1.4 for James 3.0. In addition to this, a
> stream should be left open for development (or at least maintenance) of
> James on 1.3.1.
>
> Cheers
>
> ADK
>
>
>
>
> Randahl Fink Isaksen wrote:
>
> >To Daniel and Noel (and everyone else)
> >
> >We have moved on to 1.4. I do not really see how moving forward can be a
> >problem; if people have applications which require a JDK 1.3 they can
> >always run both a JDK 1.3 and a JDK 1.4 on their server, and have the
> >old applications run on the 1.3 and James on the 1.4.
> >
> >Since James is an open source project dependant on volunteer developers,
> >and since 1.4 has many helpful features, wouldn't it be best to provide
> >the developers with the best platform possible? I think that giving the
> >developers the best possible development environment is good for the
> >productivity in any project. Unfortunately I myself is not a James
> >developer, but I have been a 1.4 developer for a long time, and I for
> >one would definitely not like to step back to 1.3.
> >
> >
> >Randahl
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Daniel Joshua [mailto:daniel.joshua@gridnode.com]
> >Sent: 3. juli 2003 07:43
> >To: 'James Users List'
> >Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
> >
> >I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
> >
> >not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other
> >applications...
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >Daniel
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, 03 July, 2003 1:28 PM
> >To: James-User Mailing List
> >Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
> >
> >
> >James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone still
> >cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us
> >know.
> >
> > --- Noel
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Randahl Fink Isaksen <ra...@rockit.dk>.
The point of view about large companies moving forward slowly is fair I
think. I am not sure, however, whether slow-moving companies represent
the majority of the James users. If most James users are large companies
which find themselves incapable of upgrading their JDKs, I understand
why James would have to stick to 1.3 for some time; and if the James
developers choose to stick to 1.3, I sure hope that it is in fact the
case that most James users are such slow moving companies. Otherwise, if
those companies represent a small minority, I think its wrong to keep
James from evolving and taking advantage of the useful new features of
1.4.
Maybe there should be an on-line user poll to find out, what kinds of
companies use James - knowing your target group well is a good basis for
many development decisions...
Randahl
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Joshua [mailto:daniel.joshua@gridnode.com]
Sent: 3. juli 2003 11:33
To: 'James Users List'
Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
+1
I agree very strongly with this point of view.
Regards,
Daniel
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Knauf [mailto:aknauf@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Friday, 04 July, 2003 5:17 AM
To: James Users List
Subject: Re: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Unfortunately, those of us who work for large companies don't have the
luxury of a viewpoint such as this. A company with a large IT
infrastructure is often not as quick on its feet as we would like it to
be. It can take years to upgrade to a new version of a software
product, depending on how important the move is perceived to be by those
at the top.
As for running both JDK's on your servers, this is not as easy as it
sounds. Yes, it is technically easy - but getting JDK 1.4 onto an HP-UX
box means patching the OS to the recommended minimum level, which means
re-testing everything on that box, which means taking down a production
box, running all sorts of critical applications, for a good chunk of
time. Not something that is easy to get past the network ops team.
I think that the best approach for now is to do as Steve and Vincenzo
suggest and aim to move to 1.4 for James 3.0. In addition to this, a
stream should be left open for development (or at least maintenance) of
James on 1.3.1.
Cheers
ADK
Randahl Fink Isaksen wrote:
>To Daniel and Noel (and everyone else)
>
>We have moved on to 1.4. I do not really see how moving forward can be
a
>problem; if people have applications which require a JDK 1.3 they can
>always run both a JDK 1.3 and a JDK 1.4 on their server, and have the
>old applications run on the 1.3 and James on the 1.4.
>
>Since James is an open source project dependant on volunteer
developers,
>and since 1.4 has many helpful features, wouldn't it be best to provide
>the developers with the best platform possible? I think that giving the
>developers the best possible development environment is good for the
>productivity in any project. Unfortunately I myself is not a James
>developer, but I have been a 1.4 developer for a long time, and I for
>one would definitely not like to step back to 1.3.
>
>
>Randahl
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Joshua [mailto:daniel.joshua@gridnode.com]
>Sent: 3. juli 2003 07:43
>To: 'James Users List'
>Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
>
>not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other
>applications...
>
>
>Regards,
>Daniel
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
>Sent: Thursday, 03 July, 2003 1:28 PM
>To: James-User Mailing List
>Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>
>James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone
still
>cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us
>know.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Daniel Joshua <da...@gridnode.com>.
+1
I agree very strongly with this point of view.
Regards,
Daniel
-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Knauf [mailto:aknauf@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Friday, 04 July, 2003 5:17 AM
To: James Users List
Subject: Re: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Unfortunately, those of us who work for large companies don't have the
luxury of a viewpoint such as this. A company with a large IT
infrastructure is often not as quick on its feet as we would like it to
be. It can take years to upgrade to a new version of a software
product, depending on how important the move is perceived to be by those
at the top.
As for running both JDK's on your servers, this is not as easy as it
sounds. Yes, it is technically easy - but getting JDK 1.4 onto an HP-UX
box means patching the OS to the recommended minimum level, which means
re-testing everything on that box, which means taking down a production
box, running all sorts of critical applications, for a good chunk of
time. Not something that is easy to get past the network ops team.
I think that the best approach for now is to do as Steve and Vincenzo
suggest and aim to move to 1.4 for James 3.0. In addition to this, a
stream should be left open for development (or at least maintenance) of
James on 1.3.1.
Cheers
ADK
Randahl Fink Isaksen wrote:
>To Daniel and Noel (and everyone else)
>
>We have moved on to 1.4. I do not really see how moving forward can be a
>problem; if people have applications which require a JDK 1.3 they can
>always run both a JDK 1.3 and a JDK 1.4 on their server, and have the
>old applications run on the 1.3 and James on the 1.4.
>
>Since James is an open source project dependant on volunteer developers,
>and since 1.4 has many helpful features, wouldn't it be best to provide
>the developers with the best platform possible? I think that giving the
>developers the best possible development environment is good for the
>productivity in any project. Unfortunately I myself is not a James
>developer, but I have been a 1.4 developer for a long time, and I for
>one would definitely not like to step back to 1.3.
>
>
>Randahl
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Joshua [mailto:daniel.joshua@gridnode.com]
>Sent: 3. juli 2003 07:43
>To: 'James Users List'
>Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
>
>not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other
>applications...
>
>
>Regards,
>Daniel
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
>Sent: Thursday, 03 July, 2003 1:28 PM
>To: James-User Mailing List
>Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>
>James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone still
>cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us
>know.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
Re: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Aaron Knauf <ak...@xtra.co.nz>.
Unfortunately, those of us who work for large companies don't have the
luxury of a viewpoint such as this. A company with a large IT
infrastructure is often not as quick on its feet as we would like it to
be. It can take years to upgrade to a new version of a software
product, depending on how important the move is perceived to be by those
at the top.
As for running both JDK's on your servers, this is not as easy as it
sounds. Yes, it is technically easy - but getting JDK 1.4 onto an HP-UX
box means patching the OS to the recommended minimum level, which means
re-testing everything on that box, which means taking down a production
box, running all sorts of critical applications, for a good chunk of
time. Not something that is easy to get past the network ops team.
I think that the best approach for now is to do as Steve and Vincenzo
suggest and aim to move to 1.4 for James 3.0. In addition to this, a
stream should be left open for development (or at least maintenance) of
James on 1.3.1.
Cheers
ADK
Randahl Fink Isaksen wrote:
>To Daniel and Noel (and everyone else)
>
>We have moved on to 1.4. I do not really see how moving forward can be a
>problem; if people have applications which require a JDK 1.3 they can
>always run both a JDK 1.3 and a JDK 1.4 on their server, and have the
>old applications run on the 1.3 and James on the 1.4.
>
>Since James is an open source project dependant on volunteer developers,
>and since 1.4 has many helpful features, wouldn't it be best to provide
>the developers with the best platform possible? I think that giving the
>developers the best possible development environment is good for the
>productivity in any project. Unfortunately I myself is not a James
>developer, but I have been a 1.4 developer for a long time, and I for
>one would definitely not like to step back to 1.3.
>
>
>Randahl
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniel Joshua [mailto:daniel.joshua@gridnode.com]
>Sent: 3. juli 2003 07:43
>To: 'James Users List'
>Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
>
>not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other
>applications...
>
>
>Regards,
>Daniel
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
>Sent: Thursday, 03 July, 2003 1:28 PM
>To: James-User Mailing List
>Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>
>James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone still
>cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us
>know.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Randahl Fink Isaksen <ra...@rockit.dk>.
To Daniel and Noel (and everyone else)
We have moved on to 1.4. I do not really see how moving forward can be a
problem; if people have applications which require a JDK 1.3 they can
always run both a JDK 1.3 and a JDK 1.4 on their server, and have the
old applications run on the 1.3 and James on the 1.4.
Since James is an open source project dependant on volunteer developers,
and since 1.4 has many helpful features, wouldn't it be best to provide
the developers with the best platform possible? I think that giving the
developers the best possible development environment is good for the
productivity in any project. Unfortunately I myself is not a James
developer, but I have been a 1.4 developer for a long time, and I for
one would definitely not like to step back to 1.3.
Randahl
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Joshua [mailto:daniel.joshua@gridnode.com]
Sent: 3. juli 2003 07:43
To: 'James Users List'
Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other
applications...
Regards,
Daniel
-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
Sent: Thursday, 03 July, 2003 1:28 PM
To: James-User Mailing List
Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone still
cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us
know.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Daniel,
> I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
>From time to time, someone brings up the question of whether or not we need
to keep avoiding JDK 1.4 features. So far we've stayed compatible. In
fact, when I prepare a build, it gets compiled with JDK 1.3.1 (JDK 1.4 for
the Javadocs).
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Daniel Joshua <da...@gridnode.com>.
I think it is best to leave it still compatible to JDK 1.3.1 minimum...
not everyone has moved to JDK 1.4 due to conflict with other applications...
Regards,
Daniel
-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
Sent: Thursday, 03 July, 2003 1:28 PM
To: James-User Mailing List
Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if anyone still
cares. If you are still using JDK prior to JDK 1.4.0, please let us know.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini <vi...@praxis.it>.
I personally agree.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Brewin [mailto:sbrewin@synsys.com]
> Sent: giovedì 3 luglio 2003 10.13
> To: 'James Users List'
> Subject: RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>
> Can we say that James 3 will require JDK 1.4? This would seem a reasonable
> breakpoint.
>
> It would be good to be able to use JDK 1.4 features without worrying about
> backward compatibility.
>
> As it stands, James' source is not JDK 1.4 compatible due to JDBC 3 being
> introduced in JDK 1.4. JDBC 3 is not source compatible with JDBC 2 as used
> by James'. See http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4/compatibility.html, item 10.
> James' Ant build detects the presence of JDBC 3 and uncomments
> the required
> code, so it can be compiled using JDK 1.4.
>
> Moving forward it would be good to be able to drop such
> workarounds - just
> in time for JDK 1.5!
>
> -- Steve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> > Sent: 03 July 2003 06:28
> > To: James-User Mailing List
> > Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
> >
> >
> > James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if
> > anyone still
> > cares.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
RE: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
Posted by Steve Brewin <sb...@synsys.com>.
Can we say that James 3 will require JDK 1.4? This would seem a reasonable
breakpoint.
It would be good to be able to use JDK 1.4 features without worrying about
backward compatibility.
As it stands, James' source is not JDK 1.4 compatible due to JDBC 3 being
introduced in JDK 1.4. JDBC 3 is not source compatible with JDBC 2 as used
by James'. See http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4/compatibility.html, item 10.
James' Ant build detects the presence of JDBC 3 and uncomments the required
code, so it can be compiled using JDK 1.4.
Moving forward it would be good to be able to drop such workarounds - just
in time for JDK 1.5!
-- Steve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> Sent: 03 July 2003 06:28
> To: James-User Mailing List
> Subject: Anyone still using JDK 1.3?
>
>
> James still supports JDK 1.3, but lately we're wondering if
> anyone still
> cares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org