POS, XUI and JDK upgrading

[Jacques Le Roux]

Hi all,

I would like to upgrade XUI. We use now 2.0.5 version without any problems but I do need a minor change that is in 2.0.6 (editing combobox).
While in this move I would also appreciate using jdk 1.5 version (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_5.jar) in place of 1.4 (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar) mostly for performance and bugs corrections.
Actually you can use XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar with jdk 1.5 without any problems but I believe we can't use 1.4 indefinitly in general.
And I don't know for you but I'm not using jdk 1.4 for OFBiz anymore.
I also tried some months ago the XUI 2.0.7 (current last stable version) but I got some problems. I think it's better waiting XUI 3 before moving along.

Of course any pros and cons are welcome before I take any changes.

Thanks

Jacques

[David E Jones-2]

For now I'd say go with the JDK 1.4 compatible one. We may want to  
reopen the discussion for requiring 1.5, but that hasn't been decided  
yet. It seems like that is coming soon though.

While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does  
anyone have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?

-David


On Dec 3, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I would like to upgrade XUI. We use now 2.0.5 version without any  
> problems but I do need a minor change that is in 2.0.6 (editing  
> combobox).
> While in this move I would also appreciate using jdk 1.5 version  
> (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_5.jar) in place of 1.4  
> (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar) mostly for performance and bugs  
> corrections.
> Actually you can use XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar with jdk 1.5  
> without any problems but I believe we can't use 1.4 indefinitly in  
> general.
> And I don't know for you but I'm not using jdk 1.4 for OFBiz anymore.
> I also tried some months ago the XUI 2.0.7 (current last stable  
> version) but I got some problems. I think it's better waiting XUI 3  
> before moving along.
>
> Of course any pros and cons are welcome before I take any changes.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques

[David E Jones-2]

On Dec 3, 2006, at 2:23 PM, David E Jones wrote:

> While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does  
> anyone have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?

Whoops... I meant: requiring Java 1.5 for OFBiz? (and making it so it  
won't run on Java 1.4)

-David

[Jacques Le Roux]

David,

From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
> For now I'd say go with the JDK 1.4 compatible one. We may want to  
> reopen the discussion for requiring 1.5, but that hasn't been decided  
> yet. It seems like that is coming soon though.

OK, that' not a problem at all.

Jacques

> While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does  
> anyone have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?
>
> -David
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I would like to upgrade XUI. We use now 2.0.5 version without any  
> > problems but I do need a minor change that is in 2.0.6 (editing  
> > combobox).
> > While in this move I would also appreciate using jdk 1.5 version  
> > (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_5.jar) in place of 1.4  
> > (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar) mostly for performance and bugs  
> > corrections.
> > Actually you can use XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar with jdk 1.5  
> > without any problems but I believe we can't use 1.4 indefinitly in  
> > general.
> > And I don't know for you but I'm not using jdk 1.4 for OFBiz anymore.
> > I also tried some months ago the XUI 2.0.7 (current last stable  
> > version) but I got some problems. I think it's better waiting XUI 3  
> > before moving along.
> >
> > Of course any pros and cons are welcome before I take any changes.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jacques

[Iain Fogg]

I don't have any objections. I'm still running 1.4 - has there been
sufficient testing to make everyone feel happy that there are no
problems with 1.5?

Cheers, Iain

Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> David,
>
> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>  
>> For now I'd say go with the JDK 1.4 compatible one. We may want to  
>> reopen the discussion for requiring 1.5, but that hasn't been decided  
>> yet. It seems like that is coming soon though.
>>    
>
> OK, that' not a problem at all.
>
> Jacques
>
>
>  
>> While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does  
>> anyone have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I would like to upgrade XUI. We use now 2.0.5 version without any  
>>> problems but I do need a minor change that is in 2.0.6 (editing  
>>> combobox).
>>> While in this move I would also appreciate using jdk 1.5 version  
>>> (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_5.jar) in place of 1.4  
>>> (XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar) mostly for performance and bugs  
>>> corrections.
>>> Actually you can use XuiCoreSwing_v2_0_6_jdk1_4.jar with jdk 1.5  
>>> without any problems but I believe we can't use 1.4 indefinitly in  
>>> general.
>>> And I don't know for you but I'm not using jdk 1.4 for OFBiz anymore.
>>> I also tried some months ago the XUI 2.0.7 (current last stable  
>>> version) but I got some problems. I think it's better waiting XUI 3  
>>> before moving along.
>>>
>>> Of course any pros and cons are welcome before I take any changes.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>      
>
>
>  

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.6/566 - Release Date: 3/12/2006

[Adam Heath-2]

David E Jones wrote:
>
> On Dec 3, 2006, at 2:23 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>
>> While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does anyone
>> have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?
>
> Whoops... I meant: requiring Java 1.5 for OFBiz? (and making it so it
> won't run on Java 1.4)

Well, it depends on which features one plans on using.

If possible, try on 1.4.  There are some tool sets that provide 1.5 like
features, but can work on a 1.4 vm.  One that I am familiar with is the
util.concurrent stuff, replacing java.util.concurrent.

[David E Jones-2]

On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:44 PM, Adam Heath wrote:

> David E Jones wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2006, at 2:23 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>
>>> While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does  
>>> anyone
>>> have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?
>>
>> Whoops... I meant: requiring Java 1.5 for OFBiz? (and making it so it
>> won't run on Java 1.4)
>
> Well, it depends on which features one plans on using.
>
> If possible, try on 1.4.  There are some tool sets that provide 1.5  
> like
> features, but can work on a 1.4 vm.  One that I am familiar with is  
> the
> util.concurrent stuff, replacing java.util.concurrent.

This is a good point and basically what we have been doing to date,  
but in general it isn't something we have total control of. As other  
libraries move to requiring 1.5 we'll have to require it as well in  
order to update those libraries.

-David

[Adam Heath-2]

David E Jones wrote:

>
> On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:44 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2006, at 2:23 PM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>> While on this topic before we get into a vote or anything, does anyone
>>>> have any objections to requiring Java 1.4 for OFBiz?
>>>
>>> Whoops... I meant: requiring Java 1.5 for OFBiz? (and making it so it
>>> won't run on Java 1.4)
>>
>> Well, it depends on which features one plans on using.
>>
>> If possible, try on 1.4.  There are some tool sets that provide 1.5 like
>> features, but can work on a 1.4 vm.  One that I am familiar with is the
>> util.concurrent stuff, replacing java.util.concurrent.
>
> This is a good point and basically what we have been doing to date, but
> in general it isn't something we have total control of. As other
> libraries move to requiring 1.5 we'll have to require it as well in
> order to update those libraries.

Well, I'll let you in on an evil plan.

Recently, sun gpled it's virtual machine.  As a first step, it released
the source for the vm(in c++), and the compiler(in java).  However, the
compiler is written to modern standards(using generics from java 1.5).

Bootstrapping is made more complex because of this, as no currently free
compiler can handle it.

So, I started working on a preprocessor to strip that stuff out, and
convert it to old code.  It's a longish-term project, but the same could
also be done to certain byte codes.

The preprocessor can already parse all of the javac source.  Just need
to start writing the tree mutators(which, due to another unrelated
project, I now have a base to start from).