jdk 1.5 or 1.6
Locked
12
12
jdk 1.5 or 1.6
 
Administrator
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
Administrator
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
Administrator
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
In reply to this post by Adrian Crum
openjdk is becoming part of several linux distributions, mac os
leopard includes only jre 1.6, so by now it is probably easier to update an old installation than to downgrade a new one. jre 1.5 has been an "alien" on windows and linux all this time, so once again it should be easy for these systems to update... manuel. On 13 Nov 2009, at 16:23, Adrian Crum wrote: > Running OFBiz on 1.6 is a good idea, because (Sun claims) 1.6 > performs better than 1.5. > > The downside is, there might be servers out there that don't have a > 1.6 JRE available. I would like to see us move on to 1.6 (especially > now that 1.7 is near), but I'm concerned for existing installations. > > -Adrian > > Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> Hi devs, >> I don't remember why we still use 1.5. Here is a thread from 2006 http://markmail.org/message/5j5es63hpsh543ct >> . >> Maybe it's time to think anew about it, don't you think so ? >> Jacques |
smime.p7s (4K)
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
What is not clear to me is what are we missing out on by supporting
both as we currently do, I think DBCP is an odd case because they obviously have tried to support 1.5 but it seems there are a couple of very minor bugs that prevent that support. Other than DBCP what would we actually change (and why) that would prevent 1.5 support? Thanks Scott HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com On 14/11/2009, at 8:46 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Sun : > Java SE & Java SE for Business Support Road Map (JDKs End of Life) > http://java.sun.com/products/archive/eol.policy.html > > 1.6 supported systems > http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/system-configurations.html > > 15 supported systems > http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/system-configurations.html > > Conclusion (I don't list what is better, only what miss from 1.5 to > 1.6) > Better for Solaris (no surprises) > > Windows x86 > no longer : Windows 98 (2nd Edition) and Windows ME (who cares ?) > no longer : Windows Server 2003, Web Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) and > Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) ( a bit more > annoying maybe) > but still : Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) > and Windows Server 2003, DataCenter Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) > > Windows x64 32-bit mode > no longer : Windows Server 2008 Datacenter (SP1, SP2) and Windows > Web Server 2008 (SP1, SP2) > but still : Windows Server 2008 Standard (SP1, SP2) and Windows > Server 2008 Enterprise (SP1, SP2) > > Linux x86 > no longer : TurboLinux 8.0 > but : Turbo Linux 10 (ONLY Chinese and Japanese Locales. No English.) > > Linux x64 32-bit mode > new : Turbo Linux 10 (ONLY Chinese and Japanese Locales. No English.) > > From this I can see only problems with > Windows Server 2003, Web Edition and Standard Edition > Windows Server 2008 Datacenter and Web Server > TurboLinux 8.0 > > Should this only stop us to migrate to jdk 1.6? Personnaly I don't > think so, now it's the community to decide... > > Jacques > PS : > Postgres does not really bring much with JDBC4 drivers (could be : http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/jdbc_four.html) > <<JDK 1.6 - JDBC4. Support for JDBC4 methods is limited. The driver > builds, but the majority of new methods are stubbed out. >> > http://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html > I come to it from this discussion http://archives.free.net.ph/thread/20090925.160633.e1923a69.fr.html#20090925.160633.e1923a69 > > A benchmark while at it http://benjchristensen.com/2009/02/12/java-jdk-15-vs-16-performance/ > > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >> Thanks Adrian, >> >> So it's the same concern than 3 years ago, I will check... >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]> >>> Running OFBiz on 1.6 is a good idea, because (Sun claims) 1.6 >>> performs >>> better than 1.5. >>> >>> The downside is, there might be servers out there that don't have >>> a 1.6 >>> JRE available. I would like to see us move on to 1.6 (especially now >>> that 1.7 is near), but I'm concerned for existing installations. >>> >>> -Adrian >>> >>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>> Hi devs, >>>> >>>> I don't remember why we still use 1.5. Here is a thread from 2006 >>>> http://markmail.org/message/5j5es63hpsh543ct. >>>> Maybe it's time to think anew about it, don't you think so ? >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > |
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
Administrator
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
+1 - I totally agree. People can always run the release branch if
they need to stay on 1.5, but the show must go on! Cheers, Ruppert On Nov 13, 2009, at 9:32 PM, David E Jones wrote: > > We had to make this decision before with 1.4 -> 1.5, and if I > remember right from 1.3 -> 1.4 too. > > Sooner or later we need to deprecate support for 1.5 in order to > move on, and to more easily be able to update various libraries and > such. The 1.5 -> 1.6 transition is a bit of a pain because they did > a few changes that were not backwards compatible. Because of that it > would be particularly nice to deprecate support for 1.5 and require > 1.6 (or later, as possible/available). > > In any case, our criteria before was to deprecate support for the > older version of Java as soon as the newer version was widely > available. At this point I think 1.6 qualifies well for that... > unless there are specific systems people use that still can't run > 1.6 then we should just update that requirement. > > -David > > > On Nov 13, 2009, at 1:02 PM, Scott Gray wrote: > >> What is not clear to me is what are we missing out on by supporting >> both as we currently do, I think DBCP is an odd case because they >> obviously have tried to support 1.5 but it seems there are a couple >> of very minor bugs that prevent that support. >> >> Other than DBCP what would we actually change (and why) that would >> prevent 1.5 support? >> >> Thanks >> Scott >> >> HotWax Media >> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >> >> On 14/11/2009, at 8:46 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >>> Sun : >>> Java SE & Java SE for Business Support Road Map (JDKs End of Life) >>> http://java.sun.com/products/archive/eol.policy.html >>> >>> 1.6 supported systems >>> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/system-configurations.html >>> >>> 15 supported systems >>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/system-configurations.html >>> >>> Conclusion (I don't list what is better, only what miss from 1.5 >>> to 1.6) >>> Better for Solaris (no surprises) >>> >>> Windows x86 >>> no longer : Windows 98 (2nd Edition) and Windows ME (who cares ?) >>> no longer : Windows Server 2003, Web Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) and >>> Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) ( a bit more >>> annoying maybe) >>> but still : Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) >>> and Windows Server 2003, DataCenter Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) >>> >>> Windows x64 32-bit mode >>> no longer : Windows Server 2008 Datacenter (SP1, SP2) and Windows >>> Web Server 2008 (SP1, SP2) >>> but still : Windows Server 2008 Standard (SP1, SP2) and Windows >>> Server 2008 Enterprise (SP1, SP2) >>> >>> Linux x86 >>> no longer : TurboLinux 8.0 >>> but : Turbo Linux 10 (ONLY Chinese and Japanese Locales. No >>> English.) >>> >>> Linux x64 32-bit mode >>> new : Turbo Linux 10 (ONLY Chinese and Japanese Locales. No >>> English.) >>> >>> From this I can see only problems with >>> Windows Server 2003, Web Edition and Standard Edition >>> Windows Server 2008 Datacenter and Web Server >>> TurboLinux 8.0 >>> >>> Should this only stop us to migrate to jdk 1.6? Personnaly I don't >>> think so, now it's the community to decide... >>> >>> Jacques >>> PS : >>> Postgres does not really bring much with JDBC4 drivers (could be : http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/jdbc_four.html >>> ) >>> <<JDK 1.6 - JDBC4. Support for JDBC4 methods is limited. The >>> driver builds, but the majority of new methods are stubbed out. >> >>> http://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html >>> I come to it from this discussion http://archives.free.net.ph/thread/20090925.160633.e1923a69.fr.html#20090925.160633.e1923a69 >>> >>> A benchmark while at it http://benjchristensen.com/2009/02/12/java-jdk-15-vs-16-performance/ >>> >>> >>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>> Thanks Adrian, >>>> >>>> So it's the same concern than 3 years ago, I will check... >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]> >>>>> Running OFBiz on 1.6 is a good idea, because (Sun claims) 1.6 >>>>> performs >>>>> better than 1.5. >>>>> >>>>> The downside is, there might be servers out there that don't >>>>> have a 1.6 >>>>> JRE available. I would like to see us move on to 1.6 (especially >>>>> now >>>>> that 1.7 is near), but I'm concerned for existing installations. >>>>> >>>>> -Adrian >>>>> >>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> Hi devs, >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't remember why we still use 1.5. Here is a thread from 2006 >>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/5j5es63hpsh543ct. >>>>>> Maybe it's time to think anew about it, don't you think so ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > |
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
In reply to this post by Tim Ruppert
+1
cheers, manuel. On 14 Nov 2009, at 05:44, Tim Ruppert wrote: > +1 - I totally agree. People can always run the release branch if > they need to stay on 1.5, but the show must go on! > > Cheers, > Ruppert > > On Nov 13, 2009, at 9:32 PM, David E Jones wrote: > >> >> We had to make this decision before with 1.4 -> 1.5, and if I >> remember right from 1.3 -> 1.4 too. >> >> Sooner or later we need to deprecate support for 1.5 in order to >> move on, and to more easily be able to update various libraries and >> such. The 1.5 -> 1.6 transition is a bit of a pain because they did >> a few changes that were not backwards compatible. Because of that >> it would be particularly nice to deprecate support for 1.5 and >> require 1.6 (or later, as possible/available). >> >> In any case, our criteria before was to deprecate support for the >> older version of Java as soon as the newer version was widely >> available. At this point I think 1.6 qualifies well for that... >> unless there are specific systems people use that still can't run >> 1.6 then we should just update that requirement. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Nov 13, 2009, at 1:02 PM, Scott Gray wrote: >> >>> What is not clear to me is what are we missing out on by >>> supporting both as we currently do, I think DBCP is an odd case >>> because they obviously have tried to support 1.5 but it seems >>> there are a couple of very minor bugs that prevent that support. >>> >>> Other than DBCP what would we actually change (and why) that would >>> prevent 1.5 support? >>> >>> Thanks >>> Scott >>> >>> HotWax Media >>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>> >>> On 14/11/2009, at 8:46 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>> >>>> Sun : >>>> Java SE & Java SE for Business Support Road Map (JDKs End of Life) >>>> http://java.sun.com/products/archive/eol.policy.html >>>> >>>> 1.6 supported systems >>>> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/system-configurations.html >>>> >>>> 15 supported systems >>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/system-configurations.html >>>> >>>> Conclusion (I don't list what is better, only what miss from 1.5 >>>> to 1.6) >>>> Better for Solaris (no surprises) >>>> >>>> Windows x86 >>>> no longer : Windows 98 (2nd Edition) and Windows ME (who cares ?) >>>> no longer : Windows Server 2003, Web Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) and >>>> Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) ( a bit more >>>> annoying maybe) >>>> but still : Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition (R2, SP1, >>>> SP2) and Windows Server 2003, DataCenter Edition (R2, SP1, SP2) >>>> >>>> Windows x64 32-bit mode >>>> no longer : Windows Server 2008 Datacenter (SP1, SP2) and >>>> Windows Web Server 2008 (SP1, SP2) >>>> but still : Windows Server 2008 Standard (SP1, SP2) and Windows >>>> Server 2008 Enterprise (SP1, SP2) >>>> >>>> Linux x86 >>>> no longer : TurboLinux 8.0 >>>> but : Turbo Linux 10 (ONLY Chinese and Japanese Locales. No >>>> English.) >>>> >>>> Linux x64 32-bit mode >>>> new : Turbo Linux 10 (ONLY Chinese and Japanese Locales. No >>>> English.) >>>> >>>> From this I can see only problems with >>>> Windows Server 2003, Web Edition and Standard Edition >>>> Windows Server 2008 Datacenter and Web Server >>>> TurboLinux 8.0 >>>> >>>> Should this only stop us to migrate to jdk 1.6? Personnaly I >>>> don't think so, now it's the community to decide... >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> PS : >>>> Postgres does not really bring much with JDBC4 drivers (could >>>> be : http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/jdbc_four.html) >>>> <<JDK 1.6 - JDBC4. Support for JDBC4 methods is limited. The >>>> driver builds, but the majority of new methods are stubbed out. >> >>>> http://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html >>>> I come to it from this discussion http://archives.free.net.ph/thread/20090925.160633.e1923a69.fr.html#20090925.160633.e1923a69 >>>> >>>> A benchmark while at it http://benjchristensen.com/2009/02/12/java-jdk-15-vs-16-performance/ >>>> >>>> >>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>>> Thanks Adrian, >>>>> >>>>> So it's the same concern than 3 years ago, I will check... >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> Running OFBiz on 1.6 is a good idea, because (Sun claims) 1.6 >>>>>> performs >>>>>> better than 1.5. >>>>>> >>>>>> The downside is, there might be servers out there that don't >>>>>> have a 1.6 >>>>>> JRE available. I would like to see us move on to 1.6 >>>>>> (especially now >>>>>> that 1.7 is near), but I'm concerned for existing installations. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Adrian >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>> Hi devs, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't remember why we still use 1.5. Here is a thread from >>>>>>> 2006 >>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/5j5es63hpsh543ct. >>>>>>> Maybe it's time to think anew about it, don't you think so ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > |
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
I'm not necessarily against it but I'm yet to hear what we actually
gain by doing so, what are these changes that we could optionally make once we stop supporting 1.5? With the change from 1.4 to 1.5 it was pretty clear because of things like generics. Regards Scott HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com On 24/11/2009, at 9:49 AM, David E Jones wrote: > > OFBiz already runs fine on 1.6, so this would just be a matter of > updating documentation and such, and then people could optionally > make changes that require 1.6. > > If everyone is in favour of this, we might as well get a vote going... > > -David > > > On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Furthermore, on a debian lenny server, there is no jdk 1.5 in the >> repository... >> >> So, in order to make this migration, what are the required steps ? >> How can we divide the work to be done ? >> >> Cheers >> >> Le 14/11/2009 05:44, Tim Ruppert a écrit : >> ../.. >> >> -- >> Erwan > |
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
Re: jdk 1.5 or 1.6
|
|
On 24/11/2009, at 11:19 AM, Matthieu Bollot wrote:
> Le lundi 23 novembre 2009 à 15:32 -0600, Adam Heath a écrit : >> Scott Gray wrote: >>> I'm not necessarily against it but I'm yet to hear what we >>> actually gain >>> by doing so, what are these changes that we could optionally make >>> once >>> we stop supporting 1.5? With the change from 1.4 to 1.5 it was >>> pretty >>> clear because of things like generics. >> >> NavigablMap, which is implemented by ConcurrentSkipListMap, which >> provides for sorted concurrent maps. > > I use java 1.6, it could explain why I still have some errors while > running junit tests. May be someone to tell me if I'm wrong ? Regards Scott |
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |