On 17 June 2012 03:40, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > On Jun 16, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> For now, I want @override so I am ok with 1.6 source but I is safe to >> the have 1.5 target? Commons-io >=2.3 is not pressing for VFS. >> >> Gary > > Why would it not be? If that is all you are doing the @Override doesn't make > it to the actual Class. See > http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/annotation/RetentionPolicy.html#SOURCE > for the retention policy used by @Override.
Does not work for me; just tried changing target for pool and running "mvn clean compile": [ERROR] BUILD FAILURE [INFO] ------------------------------------------------ [INFO] Compilation failure Failure executing javac, but could not parse the error: javac: source release 1.6 requires target release 1.6 == I'm not sure that wanting to use @Override for interface implementations is a very good reason for requiring 1.6. If there is new functionality in Java 1.6 that is required for VFS then fine. But not for a minor annotation issue. > Ralph > >> >> On Jun 16, 2012, at 16:00, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >> >>> @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 >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
