On 6 October 2010 11:49, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > The original plan for 2.0 was thinking it would be *incompatible* and > hence the major version changed - I guess it mainly stuck from that > starting point: > > http://markmail.org/message/46dos5wjdfhcr5nr > > Sebb did bring this up earlier this year though - although most of > that debate ended up about maven groupIds: > > http://markmail.org/message/flsmdalzs6tjv3va > > It is arbitrary though - my preference is for 2.0 since it makes it > easy to remember which releases were for JDK 1.3 and which for JDK > 1.5. Also it seems like moving to JDK 1.5 warrants more of a version > change than +0.1
A move to JDK 1.5 would be sufficient for a v2.0 IMO. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
