On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Thomas Neidhart <thomas.neidh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm -1 on this change. I don't see any reason to do it. We don't need >> features from a more recent Java version in commons-logging. As others >> have said: most users of commons-logging are old and older apps. > > In general I am fine with keeping the current JDK compatibility, but > there are also a few points in favor of such a change: > > * how can we ensure compatibility with such outdated JDKs today? > minimum jdk I have installed is JDK 1.5 > > * the codebase is at parts quite complex as it has to deal with > such a wide range of supported JDKs. Reducing the number for (future) > releases would simplify the maintenance (and we could remove some > old code for pre-1.4 JDKs). > > There are still lots of other (non-legacy) projects that use > commons-logging, e.g. spring. But maybe we could also keep the 1.x > branch on java 1.1, and create a 2.x branch which targets java 5.
+1 We (Commons) should more often behave like living in 2013, not like 2004. If you like to do it and if you see need for it, go and have fun! :-) -- http://www.grobmeier.de https://www.timeandbill.de --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
