t accidental or intentional ? I can see no reason. Anyway, nice icon.Michaël envoyé : 15 janvier 2022 à 17:18de : edgar.sol...@web.deà : jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.netobjet : Re: [JPP-Devel] java version conflictthanks for the heads up Brian!keeping java8 compatible is more a courtesy to po
thanks for the heads up Brian!
keeping java8 compatible is more a courtesy to possibly not even existing users
anymore. as it stands OJ is tested an runs successfully on up to jre17.
..regards ede
@Mike: from my point of view we can wait until the first important core
dependency drops java8 s
Hi JUMP-ers -
I believe at osgeolive linux we have java8 marked as LTSl more info
after March 2022
best regards from Berkeley, Calif. --Brian M Hamlin / OSGeoLive
Linux
On 1/15/22 7:12 AM, Michaud Michael wrote:
Hi Ede,
I cannot compile any more because of a java version conf
we will probably have to upgrade the maven build requirements (that's just the
build not OJ2) at some point when plugins start to drop java8. for now i
downgraded the offending plugin again.
works for me :).. ede
On 15.01.2022 16:25, edgar.sol...@web.de wrote:
run maven with -X. that should g
run maven with -X. that should give plenty more details.
currently still use a java8 to compile OJ2, so i should have seen if there is
an issue ..ede
On 15.01.2022 16:12, Michaud Michael wrote:
Hi Ede,
I cannot compile any more because of a java version conflict 52.0 vs 55.0
(java8 vs java11
Hi Ede,I cannot compile any more because of a java version conflict 52.0 vs 55.0 (java8 vs java11)Did you introduce a dependency compiled with java 11 ?Maven message does not help much in finding which class is causing the error.Michaël
___
Jump-pilot-
SS,
Sunburned Surveyor schrieb:
> [...]
> Sascha wrote: "The original JUMP uses still 1.4 IIRC and
> I would tend to say this a wise idea if you want
> to reach customers which are not willing to install
> a newer JVM (for a number of serious reasons)."
>
> What reasons would there be for avoidin
I run gentoo and it's 1.4 that is the issue as you have to accept the
license, 1.5 and 1.6 just download and install.
Paul
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 expr
Sascha,
You made some very good points. Thank you for adding them to our conversation.
Another thing to consider is that OpenJUMP is a very graphics
intensive program and the performance gains may be worth the
requirement for the newer JRE. I
Note: I do want to make sure we don't "upgrade" ourse
Sascha,
I think when you are building a platform it is OK to dictate a minimum
Java version of say 1.5 as people can have multiple VM's installed on
their machine so can support both 1.4 and 1.5 apps.
If you are developing a library which is designed to work in say a web
application server or
Hi together!
It's all about market share between 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6.
I have no concrete numbers, but I think 1.4 has
still a wide basis these days, even if there are newer
version of Java out there. The question you have to answer
is: "Does my product profit from the new features?"
I'm not not talk
O.K. - I'll stick with 1.5.
FYI:
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/Desktop/javase6/beta2.html
On 6/21/07, Paul Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would recommend for now that we stick with 1.5 for the core, plug-ins
> can be free to do whatever they want I guess.
>
> I did
I noticed that the build.xml in OpenJump/etc does not specify source and
target java versions. I don't know what the defaults are. Here is the
line from the build file:
In SkyJUMP I explicitly specify that both source and target be 1.5.
SkyJUMP's build uses:
You can
I would recommend for now that we stick with 1.5 for the core, plug-ins
can be free to do whatever they want I guess.
I did notice however that running under 1.6 or even 1.5 is a lot faster
than 1.4
Paul
Stefan Steiniger wrote:
> mhm... if we compile the nightly built with 1.5 is 1.6 a bit to
mhm... if we compile the nightly built with 1.5 is 1.6 a bit to much.
But it depends whether you use 1.6 features.
i use java 1.5. What about the others? Michael? Larry, is SkyJUMP still
on 1.4? Sascha?
stefan
Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
>Should I avoid using 1.6 in my development for plug-ins
Should I avoid using 1.6 in my development for plug-ins and the core?
The Sunburned Surveyor
On 6/21/07, Paul Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Excellent, I want to use generics in my plug-ins to make lists more type
> safe.
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> Stefan Steiniger wrote:
> > at least 1.5
> >
>
Excellent, I want to use generics in my plug-ins to make lists more type
safe.
Cheers,
Paul
Stefan Steiniger wrote:
> at least 1.5
>
> at least the nightly built is (necessarily) compiled with java 1.5
>
> stefan
>
> Paul Austin wrote:
>
>
>> Which Java version should we be developing plug-in
at least 1.5
at least the nightly built is (necessarily) compiled with java 1.5
stefan
Paul Austin wrote:
>Which Java version should we be developing plug-ins to. I notice that
>some of the modules in the core require 1.5
>
>Paul
>
>-
Which Java version should we be developing plug-ins to. I notice that
some of the modules in the core require 1.5
Paul
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express
19 matches
Mail list logo
