@Override is a compile annotation so we could have source be 1.6 and target 1.5 for that. Do you have a pressing need to upgrade to commons-io 2.3? If that is a necessity than I am OK with upgrading to Java 6 for the target. IOW, I'm not in favor of upgrading just because "Java 5 is dead" but because we actually have a requirement to do it.
Ralph On Jun 15, 2012, at 7:46 AM, garydgregory wrote: > (posting from nabble as I've lost the thread in my inbox) > > I want to revive using Java 6 this for trunk. Java 5 is dead, no only is > forcing projects to update to the trunk stream from VFS 2.0. > > In addition to the list below: > > - Make VFS more attractive for new user/developers, new committers in the > 21st century. No one can force anyone to upgrade to the next version. > - Keep VFS relevant. The older versions are still there for volunteers to > patch. > - Open the door for newer versions of jars that required Java 6, like > commons-io 2.3. > > *I want to use Java 6 @Override on more methods which I find extremely > helpful.* > > Thank you, > Gary > > -- > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ralph Goers <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Thanks. We to we're taken by surprise by this as it was not discussed >> prior to the change. A > > > This has been backed out of SVN for now. > > (from the JIRA:) > > Whys: > - Make VFS more attractive for new user/developers, new committers in the > 21st century. No one can force anyone to upgrade to the next version. > - Keep VFS relevant. The older versions are still there for volunteers to > patch. > - Open the door for newer versions of jars that required Java 6, like > commons-io 2.3. > > Gary > > >> s a rule the minimum version should only be changed if something requires >> it. I'm waiting for a response from Gary as to why this was necessary >> before asking him to revert it. >> >> Ralph >> >> On May 14, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Andreas Persson < >> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >>>> FYI: I've updated VFS trunk to Java 6 to avoid getting stuck on older >>>> versions of jars and further moving VFS in the 21st century ;) Tasked >>>> as VFS-415. >>> >>> I was happy to see VFS-414 and VFS-313 being fixed, thank you very much >> for that! The change in VFS-415 however makes it impossible for us to use >> VFS 2.1 (we have several jboss 4 installations left, and jboss 4 doesn't >> support jdk 6). I just wanted you to know that there still are VFS users >> that depend on jdk 1.5 compatibility. >>> >>> /Andreas >>> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.com/VFS-Update-VFS-trunk-to-Java-6-tp4629464p4635119.html > Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
