sebb wrote: > On 5 November 2010 17:36, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> wrote: >> sebb wrote: >> >>> On 5 November 2010 17:11, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> wrote: >>>> Gary Gregory wrote: >>>> >>>>> One thing that drives me nuts is that most project do not list the JRE >>>>> requirements on the front page of the project. It's not even in the >>>>> project dependencies either. >>>>> >>>>> So we should at least update the docs IMO for Java 5. >>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Not a blocker though. >>>> >>>> However, it seems that the news section should have been really updated >>>> as proposed: Minimum Java 1.4 (or 5 - depends on what we decide). >>> >>> It's not possible currently to compile the core code using Java 1.4. >>> >>> Since we ship source, I think this is a blocker. >> >> Not if we increase the (documented) minimum Java version to 5 ;-) >> Then Ralph can release if the vote passes. > > But that requires a new RC to fix the version of Java which is in > pom.xml and of course in the Manifests.
It does not really harm that the target JDK has been 1.4. > Possibly elsewhere too in the source files. > > Either way, I think we need a new RC. As long as minimum JDK is documented on the VFS home page, I'm fine with it for Java 5. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
