Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-30 Thread Jörg Schaible
Hi Christian, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:53 AM, sebb wrot >> However, a compatibility break would require a major version bump. > > if my lib does drop support for a specific jdk, isn't that a > compatibility break? My argument is it is no longer compatible

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-30 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Hello, Le 30/03/2012 02:21, sebb a écrit : > On 30 March 2012 01:00, Christian Grobmeier wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:53 AM, sebb wrot >>> However, a compatibility break would require a major version bump. >> >> if my lib does drop support for a specific jdk, isn't that a >> com

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread sebb
On 30 March 2012 01:00, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:53 AM, sebb wrot >> However, a compatibility break would require a major version bump. > > if my lib does drop support for a specific jdk, isn't that a > compatibility break? My argument is it is no longer comp

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread Jochen Wiedmann
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:00 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:53 AM, sebb wrot >> However, a compatibility break would require a major version bump. > > if my lib does drop support for a specific jdk, isn't that a > compatibility break? My argument is it is no lo

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread Christian Grobmeier
Hi, On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:53 AM, sebb wrot > However, a compatibility break would require a major version bump. if my lib does drop support for a specific jdk, isn't that a compatibility break? My argument is it is no longer compatible with jdk5. However, please do not consider my concerns a

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread sebb
On 30 March 2012 00:36, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Gary Gregory wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Christian Grobmeier >> wrote: >> >>> +1 on the move to java 6 >>> >>> we should consider to go to 3.0... its a breaking change... but i >>> leave it up to you >>> >> >> Since you are the second

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread Jörg Schaible
Gary Gregory wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Christian Grobmeier > wrote: > >> +1 on the move to java 6 >> >> we should consider to go to 3.0... its a breaking change... but i >> leave it up to you >> > > Since you are the second person that suggests it, this Java move on this > partic

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread Gary Gregory
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > +1 on the move to java 6 > > we should consider to go to 3.0... its a breaking change... but i > leave it up to you > Since you are the second person that suggests it, this Java move on this particular component could be a 3.0. I can g

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread Christian Grobmeier
+1 on the move to java 6 we should consider to go to 3.0... its a breaking change... but i leave it up to you On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > >> Will the resulting jars still run on jdk 1.5? >> I think I would sug

Re: [io] Moving to Java 6 for version 2.3

2012-03-29 Thread Gary Gregory
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > Will the resulting jars still run on jdk 1.5? > I think I would suggest a new major version if not. > Hi Paul. No, if we use Java 6 APIs, you'll get errors on Java 5. We have not required major version change in the past for changing Jav