-
1. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
galder.zamarreno May 30, 2006 11:54 AM (in response to manik)If you don't base it on 5 now, when are you going to be able to do it next? Are you allowed to change the JDK with minor release or only with major ones?
If JBoss Retro is can do the job then, +1 on moving to 5. Messaging are also planning to use JBoss Retro. -
2. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
manik May 30, 2006 12:47 PM (in response to manik)And there is Hibernate as well - which uses a 1.4 baseline with no forseeable plans to switch.
Hmm, JBoss Retro will be pretty central to this if we want to make this switch.
Dislike the idea of having twice as many distros though, a 1.4compat and 'default' packages. -
3. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
ben.wang May 30, 2006 11:39 PM (in response to manik)So can JBoss Retro do the job then? If it can, then I think we should do it.
For one thing, PojoCache 2.0 is going to support JDK5.0 only becuase of annotation. So it'd be nice if we are on the same boat. :-) -
4. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
manik May 31, 2006 3:52 AM (in response to manik)JBoss Retro can, only it adds about 3 extra jars to the "compatible" distro. Not a big deal, IMO, as I expect more and more people to move to JDK5 given that 6 will be out soon and 1.4.x is end-of-life.
-
5. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
galder.zamarreno May 31, 2006 5:39 PM (in response to manik)Well, if PojoCache 2.0 is only supporting Java 5.0, I guess Retro will have to
be included anyway. Does JBoss Retro retrofit annotations as well? How does
it work exactly? -
6. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
brian.stansberry May 31, 2006 6:15 PM (in response to manik)Thinking out loud about implications of this for the 4.0.x AS series:
I guess JBC/PojoCache 2.x would never be included with the 4.0.x series, even as an installer option, due to API incompatibility. I certainly don't want to have 2 sets of 4.0.x AS clustering code, one that knows the JBC 2.0 API and one that knows JBC 1.x. So, from the AS integration point of view I have no objection to JDK 5.0-only.
[OT] This does mean that 1.4.0 is kind of the end of the line for what can integrate into 4.0.x. That's a bit of a concern as its the first release with BR. -
7. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
galder.zamarreno May 31, 2006 7:39 PM (in response to manik)1.4 was always going to be the last release in the 1.x series anyway, wasn't
it? I guess any BR issues can be fixed in the 1.4.x series?
+1 on not integrating 2.x with 4.0.x, otherwise Bryan will be cursing Manik for
the rest of his life... ;-) -
8. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
belaban Jun 1, 2006 4:23 AM (in response to manik)+1 on making JDK5 the baseline
-1 on JBossRetro.
In general: -1 on any new JARs being added. Hmm, correction, -1 on any new JARs being *shipped* with JBossCache, so retro might be okay... :-) -
9. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
manik Jun 1, 2006 6:23 AM (in response to manik)"bstansberry@jboss.com" wrote:
[OT] This does mean that 1.4.0 is kind of the end of the line for what can integrate into 4.0.x. That's a bit of a concern as its the first release with BR.
Well, 1.4.0 will be patched as necessary with SPs, and possibly a 1.4.1/1.4.2. But the key thing is that no new features go into the 1.x. series after 1.4.0.
At least, that's how I see it. -
10. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
manik Jun 1, 2006 6:26 AM (in response to manik)"bela@jboss.com" wrote:
+1 on making JDK5 the baseline
-1 on JBossRetro.
The problem with not having a mechanism for Java 1.4.2 compat (i.e., using JBoss Retro) is the following use cases will kick up with issues:
* Standalone use of JBC with older JDKs
* Use in other app servers (esp. IBM!) WebLogic 8.x series and before will not run under JDK5 (actually breaks!)
* Use with Hibernate. Hibernate is baselined at Java 1.4 because it is used very frequently on WebSphere/WebLogic. -
11. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
starksm64 Jun 1, 2006 9:17 AM (in response to manik)"bela@jboss.com" wrote:
+1 on making JDK5 the baseline
-1 on JBossRetro.
In general: -1 on any new JARs being added. Hmm, correction, -1 on any new JARs being *shipped* with JBossCache, so retro might be okay... :-)
So bundle the dependent classes in the jboss retrod version of the cache jars. This of course brings up the possibility of conflicts with other envrionments using jboss retro such as jbossas. I don't view the extra jars as a valid critique here. -
12. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
galder.zamarreno Jun 1, 2006 10:05 AM (in response to manik)"manik.surtani@jboss.com" wrote:
"bstansberry@jboss.com" wrote:
[OT] This does mean that 1.4.0 is kind of the end of the line for what can integrate into 4.0.x. That's a bit of a concern as its the first release with BR.
Well, 1.4.0 will be patched as necessary with SPs, and possibly a 1.4.1/1.4.2. But the key thing is that no new features go into the 1.x. series after 1.4.0.
At least, that's how I see it.
that's my view as well. -
13. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
ben.wang Jun 19, 2006 8:38 PM (in response to manik)So do we have consensus to go for JDK5.0 on the head branch for both JBC and PojoCache?
-
14. Re: Habanero: Should we baseline on Java 5?
brian.stansberry Jun 19, 2006 8:43 PM (in response to manik)+1