You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to ojb-dev@db.apache.org by Armin Waibel <ar...@apache.org> on 2004/10/01 14:30:53 UTC
[OJB1.1] J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement for OJB 1.1?
Hi all,
after seeing a similar thread in Forrest I thought about this for OJB1.1.
J2SE 5.0 is released and J2SE1.4 is more than 2 years (August 2002?)
old. The time frame for OJB1.1 is end of this year (beginning of 2005).
So wouldn't it be reasonable to use J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement for
OJB1.1 (JDK 1.3 was released in 2000)? Should we really support a 5 year
old JVM in OJB1.1? Or need OJB user in year 2005 further on support for
JDK1.3?
regards,
Armin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: [OJB1.1] J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement for OJB 1.1?
Posted by Martin Kalén <mk...@apache.org>.
Armin Waibel wrote:
> So wouldn't it be reasonable to use J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement for
> OJB1.1 (JDK 1.3 was released in 2000)? Should we really support a 5 year
> old JVM in OJB1.1? Or need OJB user in year 2005 further on support for
> JDK1.3?
I need to run OJB under a 1.3 JVM, so I'm selfishly in favor of keeping it for OJB1.1. :-)
Cheers,
martin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: [OJB1.1] J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement for OJB 1.1?
Posted by Brian McCallister <mc...@forthillcompany.com>.
I am all in favor of requiring 1.3 (dynamic proxies) but also wonder
what we get with 1.4 in addition. IIRC we don't use regex's anywhere
significant, nor need faster Swing ;-)
We really need to make sure we build/run correctly under 1.5 now that
it is released, as well. I am on a 1.5-less platform so cannot do so
conveniently =/
-Brian
On Oct 1, 2004, at 8:36 AM, Thomas Dudziak wrote:
> Armin Waibel wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> after seeing a similar thread in Forrest I thought about this for
>> OJB1.1.
>> J2SE 5.0 is released and J2SE1.4 is more than 2 years (August 2002?)
>> old. The time frame for OJB1.1 is end of this year (beginning of
>> 2005).
>>
>> So wouldn't it be reasonable to use J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement
>> for OJB1.1 (JDK 1.3 was released in 2000)? Should we really support a
>> 5 year old JVM in OJB1.1? Or need OJB user in year 2005 further on
>> support for JDK1.3?
>
> Hmm, what are the immediate benefits for the developers ? I mean, J2SE
> 1.4 does not differ too much from 1.3, at least it is manageable with
> the preprocessing, or not ?
> And IMO we should only officially claim support for J2SE 5 iff we
> support the new language features, foremost enums, autoboxing and
> templates. Not to forget that a few folks still use OJB with J2SE/J2EE
> 1.3 and might not be able to change anytime soon.
>
> Tom
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org
Re: [OJB1.1] J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement for OJB 1.1?
Posted by Thomas Dudziak <to...@first.fhg.de>.
Armin Waibel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> after seeing a similar thread in Forrest I thought about this for OJB1.1.
> J2SE 5.0 is released and J2SE1.4 is more than 2 years (August 2002?)
> old. The time frame for OJB1.1 is end of this year (beginning of 2005).
>
> So wouldn't it be reasonable to use J2SE 1.4 as minimum requirement
> for OJB1.1 (JDK 1.3 was released in 2000)? Should we really support a
> 5 year old JVM in OJB1.1? Or need OJB user in year 2005 further on
> support for JDK1.3?
Hmm, what are the immediate benefits for the developers ? I mean, J2SE
1.4 does not differ too much from 1.3, at least it is manageable with
the preprocessing, or not ?
And IMO we should only officially claim support for J2SE 5 iff we
support the new language features, foremost enums, autoboxing and
templates. Not to forget that a few folks still use OJB with J2SE/J2EE
1.3 and might not be able to change anytime soon.
Tom
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@db.apache.org