> It's just a statement that new stuff will require other new stuff. For me the operational word is "require" :-)
And slightly easier development is *not* a hard requirement in my book. Most of the problems the new resource construct can avoid can also be avoided using findbug, checkstyle, etc... /Tonny -- Tonny Madsen My profiles: [image: LinkedIn] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/tonnymadsen> [image: Twitter] <http://twitter.com/tonnymadsen> [image: Blogger]<http://tonnymadsen.blogspot.dk/> [image: SlideShare] <http://www.slideshare.net/nonty> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Thomas Hallgren <tho...@tada.se> wrote: > On 2013-05-30 22:19, Tonny Madsen wrote: > >> No so... Remember that Eclipse can be installed everywhere - Java cannot. >> > > That is a good point. However, I've never been able to understand why > inertia in some organizations product department should be allowed to hold > back technology progress for the developers. If an organization does allow > upgrades of Eclipse (and hence upgrades of their development environments), > then I find it very likely that they will allow the developers to use Java > 7 as well. The fact that the developed product then runs on a Java 6 JVM is > not relevant. m2e is all about development. The resulting artifact may well > run on much older platforms. > > So, It's not like anything is taken away. It's just a statement that new > stuff will require other new stuff. If you don't like new stuff, then just > stay with the old! But don't expect all others to do so just because. > > - thomas > > > ______________________________**_________________ > m2e-users mailing list > m2e-users@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/**mailman/listinfo/m2e-users<https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-users> >
_______________________________________________ m2e-users mailing list m2e-users@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2e-users
