From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Wed Apr 01 20:41:18 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 67458 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2009 20:41:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Apr 2009 20:41:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 33896 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2009 20:41:18 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 33832 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2009 20:41:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 33822 invoked by uid 99); 1 Apr 2009 20:41:18 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:41:18 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mailout03.yourhostingaccount.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:41:09 +0000 Received: from mailscan11.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=mailscan11.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout03.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1Lp7Eq-0001s7-PW for john56@example.net; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:40:44 -0400 Received: from impout03.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155] helo=impout03.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1Lp7Eq-0007AQ-Gc for john56@example.net; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:40:44 -0400 Received: from authsmtp08.yourhostingaccount.com ([83.161.120.155]) by impout03.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id aLgk1b0020ASqTN0000000; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:40:44 -0400 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-IMPSID: aLgk1b0020ASqTN0000000 Received: from ip70-189-103-169.ok.ok.cox.net ([83.161.120.155] helo=[83.161.120.155]) by authsmtp08.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim) id 1Lp7Ep-00041d-RS for john56@example.net; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:40:44 -0400 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:40:40 -0500 From: Gregg Wonderly <john56@example.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john56@example.net Subject: Re: Migration to Java 5 References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <1238167400.4140.248.camel@cameron> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 5bac21c6012e8295aaee92c67842fba3:d1e94006e19829b2b3cf849ab9ff0f3c X-EN-AuthUser: greggwon Sender: Gregg Wonderly <john56@example.net> X-EN-OrigIP: 83.161.120.155 X-EN-OrigHost: ip70-189-103-169.ok.ok.cox.net X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org James Grahn wrote: > Actually, Gregg, what I had in mind was this: > > public <T extends Entry> T read(T template, Transaction txn, long timeout) I always forget about that very handy way to restrict parameters and return values to the same type. That will be a useful way to help manage that the types are in the right hierarchy. Gregg Wonderly From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Wed Apr 01 23:28:06 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 39528 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2009 23:28:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Apr 2009 23:28:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 86250 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2009 23:28:06 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 86185 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2009 23:28:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 86175 invoked by uid 99); 1 Apr 2009 23:28:06 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 23:28:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f172.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 23:27:59 +0000 Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so286781fxm.12 for <john56@example.net>; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:27:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cQVSEhwwI9fYjFmgWC+cgOAbq1J3bqEwOx8/y865MH0=; b=QC9Fxq49zBQxbeav/M4wSuvOc34dwJE/IOpe/Tsi6fOUfMu1vtaC3ysTU2fgz3jK4K MrapQBxH8NQ3UkZt3HCKHs9AcSZLCWERG5PYWsCR4LEhqLzJzfEKtXXOxjgfgq1wa9gY ik9YlwE7pceSfwCIKMzBGSq4hrRiywjuTvpMI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=xNg21Hmrq05yqGd8EUc/7zBExvi7wmjiIO0oZsMgjUnTJW+V4998ur3vlnjxcs5lYE GLx6acpwwSAMLPWoUssb81Y5rdWYDjTu4zXmR3hwBN2WgYunnK1h53DwEHM2HehaWlPE NkCyLr2+xFVgDffBM4JQlqvBEvxTyqDUgwZcs= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 01:27:23 +0200 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id b17mr2962246bkh.212.1238628458232; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Subject: Re: Hudson build is back to normal: River-trunk #160 From: Jukka Zitting <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Jonathan Costers <john56@example.net> wrote: > I notice Hudson is still using the make files to build the River QA harness > and tests (when I look at the console output). Maybe we should reconfigure > it to use Ant for building and running the harness and tests? Yes, that would be good. Do you have suggestions for the appropriate ant targets to invoke in the CI build? Ideally we could have one reasonably fast CI build that we can run as often as possible (i.e. whenever a commit is made), and another more intensive CI build that's run daily or weekly depending on how long it takes. BR, Jukka Zitting From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Thu Apr 02 03:06:23 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 11683 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2009 03:06:23 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2009 03:06:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 31873 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 03:06:23 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 31763 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 03:06:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 31753 invoked by uid 99); 2 Apr 2009 03:06:22 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:06:22 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nskntmtas05p.mx.bigpond.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:06:14 +0000 Received: from nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com ([83.161.120.155]) by nskntmtas05p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <john56@example.net> for <john56@example.net>; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 03:05:50 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (really [83.161.120.155]) by nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090402030549.EGHT20709.nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@[83.161.120.155]> for <john56@example.net>; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 03:05:49 +0000 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:07:28 +1000 From: Peter Firmstone <john56@example.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (X11/20080531) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john56@example.net Subject: Java 1.4, 5 and 6, Retrotranslator - further investigation, Serialization Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.49D42B8E.0107,ss=1,fgs=0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I've been looking into the use of Retrotranslator to support the legacy JRE 1.4 platform, so we can move forward, taking advantage of later Java language features. Taras Puchko, the developer of Retrotranslator has kindly answered some questions for me regarding Serialization compatibility of backported classes, for Serialization compatibility between the River JRE 1.4 Backport release and the Java 5 and later release, we need to implement backports of ObjectInputStream and ObjectOutputStream, as Taras Puchko has suggested we begin with the sources from Apache Harmony. Also I noticed on the Retrotranslator website http://retrotranslator.sourceforge.net/ a number of Java 6 API features are supported also. That has made me ponder, based on comments on Migration to Java 6, whether the Backport Release of River should be used for JRE 1.4 and JRE 5? Note the backport concurrency utils used by Retrotranslator, have the Bug fixes implemented in Java 6 and are well tested. The consensus so far has been in favour of a move to Java 5, with some people supporting a move to Java 6 instead. What are your thoughts? Cheers, Peter. Discussion Forums: Open Discussion <http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=513539> Admin <http://sourceforge.net/forum/admin/?group_id=153566> *Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7028159>* (New) By: Pete_ (pete_ <http://sourceforge.net/users/pete_/>) - 2009-03-31 03:37 How does Retrotranslator affect serialized objects? Is there some documentation that identifies which objects are safe to Serialize and those that aren't? Best Regards, Peter. *RE: Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7030583>* (New) By: Taras Puchko (tarasp <http://sourceforge.net/users/tarasp/>Project Admin <http://sourceforge.net/help/icon_legend.php?context=group_admin&uname=tarasp&this_group=153566&return_to=%2F>) - 2009-03-31 09:51 Hi Peter! It's unsafe to serialize an object with an original JDK 1.5 application and deserialize it with the same application but translated, or vice versa, but it's ok to serialize and deserialize any objects with the same translated application. Translated classes differ from their original counterparts in two ways. First, they might have additional synthetic static fields, so computed SerialVersionUID would be different. Second, they might reference backports instead of classes introduced in JDK 1.5. So if you want a JDK 1.5 application and a translated one to interoperate via serialization, don't use JDK 1.5 features in serialized classes (e.g. enums) and put SerialVersionUID into each class. Regards, Taras. *RE: Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7036667>* (New) By: Pete_ (pete_ <http://sourceforge.net/users/pete_/>) - 2009-04-01 00:42 Thanks Taras, Neat program by the way ;) I like the elegant way you've enabled extensions to Retrotranslator. Getting into detailed specifics (please forgive me): For a JDK 1.5 application and a translated one, interoperating via serialization (I'm only interested in Value classes, not things that shouldn't be serialized). Case 1: Where a class such as String that is compatible across JVM versions with Serialization (has the same serialVersionUID). Where that class has synthetic static fields or methods in the translated version. Is it still Deserializable? Case 2: Where a backported class extends Serializable and has the same serialVersionUID as the native Java 5 class eg AtomicLong. Is it still Deserializable? Case 3: Java 5 Language Features (Excluding features with new API Classes like Enum) like Generics, Annotations and the enhanced For loop? Do these affect classes implementing Serializable? Case 4: What about this Enum? public enum Day { MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY, SUNDAY; private static final long serialVersionUID = -4549794470754669710L; } If it can be Serialized / Deserialized, when it returns to the JVM 1.4, will a new object be instantiated or will it honor the singleton pattern and not instantiate a second enum? Regards, Peter. *RE: Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7040977>* (New) By: Taras Puchko (tarasp <http://sourceforge.net/users/tarasp/>Project Admin <http://sourceforge.net/help/icon_legend.php?context=group_admin&uname=tarasp&this_group=153566&return_to=%2F>) - 2009-04-01 12:07 Hi Peter, Case 1: Yes, as long as it has serialVersionUID and don't reference backported classes. Case 2: No, since the name of backported class is different. Case 3: Yes, I believe that most Java 5 language features (excluding enum) don't affect serialization. Case 4: Yes, when using the same translated application enums honor the singleton pattern. Cheers, Taras *RE: Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7038442>* (New) By: Pete_ (pete_ <http://sourceforge.net/users/pete_/>) - 2009-04-01 05:59 Just a quick update, Looks like you can't modify the serialVersionUID of an enum, its always 0L. Wishful thinking on my part ; ) Cheers, Peter. *RE: Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7039529>* (New) By: Pete_ (pete_ <http://sourceforge.net/users/pete_/>) - 2009-04-01 09:01 Hi Taras, Just had a little play, I get it now, I think. Retrotranlator doesn't attempt to support Serialization of API implementation / backported classes, since the class fully qualified names are different, so that a transformed class can run on a later platform without stepping on the java namespace. bash-3.00$ serialver net.sf.retrotranslator.runtime.java.lang.Enum_ net.sf.retrotranslator.runtime.java.lang.Enum_: static final long serialVersionUID = 3370713009433686859L; bash-3.00$ serialver java.lang.Enum java.lang.Enum: static final long serialVersionUID = 0L; I wonder if your implementation of Enum can be made Serialization compatible with java.lang.Enum? I wonder if its possible to change the fully qualified name of an implementation class just after serialization, from a lookup registry (perhaps wrap / intercept the ObjectOutputStream), to the standard Java fully qualified name, and change it back to the implementation class's fully qualified name during deserialization (perhaps wrap / intercept ObjectInputStream)? From the javadoc on ObjectInputStream: Enum constants are deserialized differently than ordinary serializable or externalizable objects. The serialized form of an enum constant consists solely of its name; field values of the constant are not transmitted. To deserialize an enum constant, ObjectInputStream reads the constant name from the stream; the deserialized constant is then obtained by calling the static method Enum.valueOf(Class, String) with the enum constant's base type and the received constant name as arguments. Like other serializable or externalizable objects, enum constants can function as the targets of back references appearing subsequently in the serialization stream. The process by which enum constants are deserialized cannot be customized: any class-specific readObject, readObjectNoData, and readResolve methods defined by enum types are ignored during deserialization. Similarly, any serialPersistentFields or serialVersionUID field declarations are also ignored--all enum types have a fixed serialVersionUID of 0L. From the Serialization Spec: The ObjectStreamClass provides information about classes that are saved in a Serialization stream. The descriptor provides the fully-qualified name of the class and its serialization version UID. A SerialVersionUID identifies the unique original class version for which this class is capable of writing streams and from which it can read. *RE: Serialization <http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7040978>* (New) By: Taras Puchko (tarasp <http://sourceforge.net/users/tarasp/>Project Admin <http://sourceforge.net/help/icon_legend.php?context=group_admin&uname=tarasp&this_group=153566&return_to=%2F>) - 2009-04-01 12:08 Hi Peter, Yes, you can achieve serialization compatibility of enums and other backported classes using custom backports of ObjectInputStream/ObjectOutputStream. The initial sources could be taken from Apache Harmony. Cheers, Taras From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Thu Apr 02 03:17:17 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 13047 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2009 03:17:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2009 03:17:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 40932 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 03:17:17 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 40857 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 03:17:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 40844 invoked by uid 99); 2 Apr 2009 03:17:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:17:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nskntmtas03p.mx.bigpond.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:17:07 +0000 Received: from nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com ([83.161.120.155]) by nskntmtas03p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <john56@example.net> for <john56@example.net>; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 03:16:44 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (really [83.161.120.155]) by nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090402031642.VCIA6515.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@[83.161.120.155]> for <john56@example.net>; Thu, 2 Apr 2009 03:16:42 +0000 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:18:21 +1000 From: Peter Firmstone <john56@example.net> Reply-To: john56@example.net User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (X11/20080531) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john56@example.net Subject: Java 1.4, 5 and 6, Retrotranslator - further investigation, Serialization Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.49D42E1B.010A,ss=1,fgs=0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I've been looking into the use of Retrotranslator to support the legacy JRE 1.4 platform, so we can move forward, taking advantage of later Java language features. Taras Puchko, the developer of Retrotranslator has kindly answered some questions for me regarding Serialization compatibility of backported classes, for Serialization compatibility between the River JRE 1.4 Backport release and the Java 5 and later release, we need to implement backports of ObjectInputStream and ObjectOutputStream, as Taras Puchko has suggested we begin with the sources from Apache Harmony. Also I noticed on the Retrotranslator website http://retrotranslator.sourceforge.net/ a number of Java 6 API features are supported also. That has made me ponder, based on comments on Migration to Java 6, whether the Backport Release of River should be used for JRE 1.4 and JRE 5? Note the backport concurrency utils used by Retrotranslator, have the Bug fixes implemented in Java 6 and are well tested. The consensus so far has been in favour of a move to Java 5, with some people supporting a move to Java 6 instead. What are your thoughts? Cheers, Peter. Sorry about the format in previous message, its fixed here: http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=513539 How does Retrotranslator affect serialized objects? Is there some documentation that identifies which objects are safe to Serialize and those that aren't? Best Regards, Peter. *RE: Serialization http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7030583 By: Taras Puchko Hi Peter! It's unsafe to serialize an object with an original JDK 1.5 application and deserialize it with the same application but translated, or vice versa, but it's ok to serialize and deserialize any objects with the same translated application. Translated classes differ from their original counterparts in two ways. First, they might have additional synthetic static fields, so computed SerialVersionUID would be different. Second, they might reference backports instead of classes introduced in JDK 1.5. So if you want a JDK 1.5 application and a translated one to interoperate via serialization, don't use JDK 1.5 features in serialized classes (e.g. enums) and put SerialVersionUID into each class. Regards, Taras. *RE: Serialization http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7036667 By: Pete_ Thanks Taras, Neat program by the way ;) I like the elegant way you've enabled extensions to Retrotranslator. Getting into detailed specifics (please forgive me): For a JDK 1.5 application and a translated one, interoperating via serialization (I'm only interested in Value classes, not things that shouldn't be serialized). Case 1: Where a class such as String that is compatible across JVM versions with Serialization (has the same serialVersionUID). Where that class has synthetic static fields or methods in the translated version. Is it still Deserializable? Case 2: Where a backported class extends Serializable and has the same serialVersionUID as the native Java 5 class eg AtomicLong. Is it still Deserializable? Case 3: Java 5 Language Features (Excluding features with new API Classes like Enum) like Generics, Annotations and the enhanced For loop? Do these affect classes implementing Serializable? Case 4: What about this Enum? public enum Day { MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY, SUNDAY; private static final long serialVersionUID = -4549794470754669710L; } If it can be Serialized / Deserialized, when it returns to the JVM 1.4, will a new object be instantiated or will it honor the singleton pattern and not instantiate a second enum? Regards, Peter. *RE: Serialization http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7040977 By: Taras Puchko Hi Peter, Case 1: Yes, as long as it has serialVersionUID and don't reference backported classes. Case 2: No, since the name of backported class is different. Case 3: Yes, I believe that most Java 5 language features (excluding enum) don't affect serialization. Case 4: Yes, when using the same translated application enums honor the singleton pattern. Cheers, Taras *RE: Serialization http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7038442 By: Pete_ Just a quick update, Looks like you can't modify the serialVersionUID of an enum, its always 0L. Wishful thinking on my part ; ) Cheers, Peter. *RE: Serialization http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7039529 By: Pete_ Hi Taras, Just had a little play, I get it now, I think. Retrotranlator doesn't attempt to support Serialization of API implementation / backported classes, since the class fully qualified names are different, so that a transformed class can run on a later platform without stepping on the java namespace. bash-3.00$ serialver net.sf.retrotranslator.runtime.java.lang.Enum_ net.sf.retrotranslator.runtime.java.lang.Enum_: static final long serialVersionUID = 3370713009433686859L; bash-3.00$ serialver java.lang.Enum java.lang.Enum: static final long serialVersionUID = 0L; I wonder if your implementation of Enum can be made Serialization compatible with java.lang.Enum? I wonder if its possible to change the fully qualified name of an implementation class just after serialization, from a lookup registry (perhaps wrap / intercept the ObjectOutputStream), to the standard Java fully qualified name, and change it back to the implementation class's fully qualified name during deserialization (perhaps wrap / intercept ObjectInputStream)? From the javadoc on ObjectInputStream: Enum constants are deserialized differently than ordinary serializable or externalizable objects. The serialized form of an enum constant consists solely of its name; field values of the constant are not transmitted. To deserialize an enum constant, ObjectInputStream reads the constant name from the stream; the deserialized constant is then obtained by calling the static method Enum.valueOf(Class, String) with the enum constant's base type and the received constant name as arguments. Like other serializable or externalizable objects, enum constants can function as the targets of back references appearing subsequently in the serialization stream. The process by which enum constants are deserialized cannot be customized: any class-specific readObject, readObjectNoData, and readResolve methods defined by enum types are ignored during deserialization. Similarly, any serialPersistentFields or serialVersionUID field declarations are also ignored--all enum types have a fixed serialVersionUID of 0L. From the Serialization Spec: The ObjectStreamClass provides information about classes that are saved in a Serialization stream. The descriptor provides the fully-qualified name of the class and its serialization version UID. A SerialVersionUID identifies the unique original class version for which this class is capable of writing streams and from which it can read. *RE: Serialization http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=7040978 By: Taras Puchko Hi Peter, Yes, you can achieve serialization compatibility of enums and other backported classes using custom backports of ObjectInputStream/ObjectOutputStream. The initial sources could be taken from Apache Harmony. Cheers, Taras From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Thu Apr 02 12:56:47 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 95679 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2009 12:56:47 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2009 12:56:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 48642 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 12:56:47 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 48603 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 12:56:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 48593 invoked by uid 99); 2 Apr 2009 12:56:47 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:56:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO fg-out-1718.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:56:37 +0000 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e21so347482fga.3 for <john56@example.net>; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 05:56:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=FbK1EAvJSzFyasGLSD5lkip6tKvEWjgij9Rb3xy7aIo=; b=lQ1hVbPW/4qexnWnrIUOqWXUC5c3F4ozFefEhU5UE1R8VojXEEe2o3qxRR6uXjleKg rPF/e5md0ZeKNPEJYyezD+h8VdOfcffRhC7H2myAW/T0eM7mG1FiVtvhoYbQPU90J2p0 jtvAT99MAbeSxWOC/7uhLLgFBI4lusylH7rNQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=f3Q8VNT1L+7SACwalUSWGE8hYip12ulxCjcteGPR87cJCHBe0KY4/Q0b/4d9ztCuoz in8oSi7PZ1PChjac2ance+f57/wNlsur/ahLP3Wy9ueMx73JQ4+QdTtyIxvhF91u40tu s0xoeQyJ3G3yVViGyUaw7mIXu01SwiB7purks= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id w13mr29642fgw.76.1238676976832; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 05:56:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <626948370.1238656693387.JavaMail.jira@brutus> References: <2995526.1195575163088.JavaMail.jira@brutus> <626948370.1238656693387.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 08:56:16 -0400 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Subject: Re: [jira] Issue Comment Edited: (RIVER-272) ClassDep.java relies on Sun specific Internal JDK API From: Jonathan Costers <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd245ea321520046691f5b8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --000e0cd245ea321520046691f5b8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Will take a look asap, my day job is keeping me pretty busy for the moment ... 2009/4/2 Peter Firmstone (JIRA) <john56@example.net> > > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-272?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12694877#action_12694877] > > Peter Firmstone edited comment on RIVER-272 at 4/2/09 12:17 AM: > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > We need to add the ASM Libraries: > > trunk/lib/asm-2.2.3.jar > trunk/lib/asm-commons-2.2.3.jar > > And integrate ClassDepend into the main build file > > Cheers, > > Peter. > > > > was (Author: pfirmst): > We need to add the ASM Libraries: > > trunk/lib/asm-2.2.3.jar > trunk/lib/asm-commons-2.2.3.jar > > I noticed that the lib directory isn't in the build files classpath. > > Cheers, > > Peter. > > > > > ClassDep.java relies on Sun specific Internal JDK API > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Key: RIVER-272 > > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-272 > > Project: River > > Issue Type: Improvement > > Components: com_sun_jini_tool > > Affects Versions: jtsk_2.1 > > Environment: Windows XP, JDK 1.4 - JDK 1.6, Eclipse 3.3 IDE > > Reporter: Hakan Kocakulak > > Attachments: classdepend.zip, classdepend_backport.tgz > > > > > > ClassDep.java relies on Sun specific Internal JDK API > > import sun.tools.java.BinaryClass; > > > import sun.tools.java.ClassDeclaration; import > > > sun.tools.java.ClassFile; import sun.tools.java.ClassNotFound; import > > > sun.tools.java.ClassPath; import sun.tools.java.Constants; import > > > sun.tools.java.Environment; import sun.tools.java.Identifier; import > > > sun.tools.java.MemberDefinition; import sun.tools.java.Package; import > > > sun.tools.java.Type; > > while building from eclipse IDE, IDE do not add these Classes to > classpath and can not build project. > > -- > This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > - > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. > > --000e0cd245ea321520046691f5b8-- From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Thu Apr 02 13:07:51 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 1344 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2009 13:07:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2009 13:07:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 81533 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 13:07:51 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 81487 invoked by uid 500); 2 Apr 2009 13:07:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 81477 invoked by uid 99); 2 Apr 2009 13:07:51 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:07:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f172.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:07:43 +0000 Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so519767fxm.12 for <john56@example.net>; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:07:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=86KSdN/TP+61s4tghicorWpRrWWSmpYiisej+V2VICM=; b=fbFuQBWUkSoHguse53GTPA5R4hreHsRoXWgHLaNc+ZK6iV9JrCEllk6uocGQCqxFhz 72fXGaxukceEEYGQdnzwmTVp0Jn3WjfpEbDj2Y8QZWVZhOwcSAcLyVc3TLEg7Nmzz9n7 aYnSFzW65Us0YyHQpXQD34/GxAfJ03c04vVSY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=F7ed/8ZR3NVcsWfDbakOFGXudv4VqfnpXKq8AyZCfgVUUZe3HEvc1lNMRlzebpZGjB 79wMuWPLvRA78oq9CTR0Tp7qfBcVe2EpSvU10nRSKWcqMqNzuA3zhmmpGJkFnfx/6kUa /m0zDry8yeRRnB6xCflzMwB+2pZMS/sG7ARAI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id j2mr61275fgb.50.1238677641645; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:07:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:07:21 -0400 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Subject: Re: Hudson build is back to normal: River-trunk #160 From: Jonathan Costers <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd29722d24de70466921c14 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --000e0cd29722d24de70466921c14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If we parametrize the test categories to run (already done that in my local copy of the trunk) we could invoke ant like this: ant -Dqatests.categories=id,jeri test.qa and be able to specify different categories for the two builds Most of the categories take pretty long to run, but some do not, like "id" for instance. I have run them all by now so I could compile a list of categories to run for each build. 2009/4/1 Jukka Zitting <john56@example.net> > Hi, > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Jonathan Costers > <john56@example.net> wrote: > > I notice Hudson is still using the make files to build the River QA > harness > > and tests (when I look at the console output). Maybe we should > reconfigure > > it to use Ant for building and running the harness and tests? > > Yes, that would be good. > > Do you have suggestions for the appropriate ant targets to invoke in > the CI build? Ideally we could have one reasonably fast CI build that > we can run as often as possible (i.e. whenever a commit is made), and > another more intensive CI build that's run daily or weekly depending > on how long it takes. > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting > --000e0cd29722d24de70466921c14-- From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 07:25:29 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 89424 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 07:25:29 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 07:25:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 74464 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 07:25:27 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 74400 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 07:25:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 74390 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 07:25:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 07:25:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nschwmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 07:25:19 +0000 Received: from nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com ([83.161.120.155]) by nschwmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <john56@example.net> for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 07:24:54 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (really [83.161.120.155]) by nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090403072453.FMUS13025.nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@[83.161.120.155]> for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 07:24:53 +0000 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:26:31 +1000 From: Peter Firmstone <john56@example.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (X11/20080531) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john56@example.net Subject: Re: [jira] Issue Comment Edited: (RIVER-272) ClassDep.java relies on Sun specific Internal JDK API References: <2995526.1195575163088.JavaMail.jira@brutus> <626948370.1238656693387.JavaMail.jira@brutus> <john56@example.net> In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.49D5B9C6.0013,ss=1,fgs=0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Thanks Jonathan, better keep those beans coming in! I'm currently working on replacing the functional internals of ClassDep by making calls to ClassDepend, will have it done shortly, I'll post the code on Jira when I do. I've noticed that Jukka and yourself are quite busy working on River. Cheers, Peter. Jonathan Costers wrote: > Will take a look asap, my day job is keeping me pretty busy for the moment > ... > > > 2009/4/2 Peter Firmstone (JIRA) <john56@example.net> > > >> [ >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-272?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12694877#action_12694877] >> >> Peter Firmstone edited comment on RIVER-272 at 4/2/09 12:17 AM: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> We need to add the ASM Libraries: >> >> trunk/lib/asm-2.2.3.jar >> trunk/lib/asm-commons-2.2.3.jar >> >> And integrate ClassDepend into the main build file >> >> Cheers, >> >> Peter. >> >> >> >> was (Author: pfirmst): >> We need to add the ASM Libraries: >> >> trunk/lib/asm-2.2.3.jar >> trunk/lib/asm-commons-2.2.3.jar >> >> I noticed that the lib directory isn't in the build files classpath. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Peter. >> >> >> >> >>> ClassDep.java relies on Sun specific Internal JDK API >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> Key: RIVER-272 >>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-272 >>> Project: River >>> Issue Type: Improvement >>> Components: com_sun_jini_tool >>> Affects Versions: jtsk_2.1 >>> Environment: Windows XP, JDK 1.4 - JDK 1.6, Eclipse 3.3 IDE >>> Reporter: Hakan Kocakulak >>> Attachments: classdepend.zip, classdepend_backport.tgz >>> >>> >>> ClassDep.java relies on Sun specific Internal JDK API >>> import sun.tools.java.BinaryClass; >>> >>>> import sun.tools.java.ClassDeclaration; import >>>> sun.tools.java.ClassFile; import sun.tools.java.ClassNotFound; import >>>> sun.tools.java.ClassPath; import sun.tools.java.Constants; import >>>> sun.tools.java.Environment; import sun.tools.java.Identifier; import >>>> sun.tools.java.MemberDefinition; import sun.tools.java.Package; import >>>> sun.tools.java.Type; >>>> >>> while building from eclipse IDE, IDE do not add these Classes to >>> >> classpath and can not build project. >> >> -- >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >> - >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. >> >> >> > > From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 11:46:17 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 22919 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 11:46:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 11:46:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 85008 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 11:46:17 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 84926 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 11:46:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 84914 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 11:46:17 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 11:46:17 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nschwmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 11:46:09 +0000 Received: from nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com ([83.161.120.155]) by nschwmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <john56@example.net> for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 11:45:37 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (really [83.161.120.155]) by nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090403114536.PFXF13025.nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@[83.161.120.155]> for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 11:45:36 +0000 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:47:14 +1000 From: Peter Firmstone <john56@example.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (X11/20080531) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john56@example.net Subject: Migration to Java 5 - Summary References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <1238167400.4140.248.camel@cameron> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150203.49D5F6E1.0029,ss=1,fgs=0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Just thought I'd go back over the messages and post a summary: Those in favour of using Java 6 features: Jeremy Easton-Marks Greg Wonderly James Grahn Those in favour of using Java 5 features: Dennis Reedy Jim Waldo Jonathan Costers Greg Trasuk Niclas Hedhman Dan Rollo Greg Wonderly Jukka Zitting Sean Landis Peter Firmstone James Grahn Those who would like to see continued support for JRE 1.4 (bytecode only, using Retrotranslator): Patrick Wright Greg Trasuk Wade Chandler Peter Firmstone I propose posting the following items on Jira: 1. Migration to Java 5 Language Features and API 2. Use of Generics in JavaSpace API, as suggested by James Grahn. 3. Implementation of Retrotranslator for JRE 1.4 Runtime support. Best Regards, Peter Firmstone. Gregg Wonderly wrote: > James Grahn wrote: >> Actually, Gregg, what I had in mind was this: >> >> public <T extends Entry> T read(T template, Transaction txn, long >> timeout) > > I always forget about that very handy way to restrict parameters and > return values to the same type. That will be a useful way to help > manage that the types are in the right hierarchy. > > Gregg Wonderly > From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 12:06:37 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 33458 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 12:06:37 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 12:06:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 11537 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 12:06:37 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 11490 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 12:06:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 11480 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 12:06:37 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:06:37 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO yw-out-1718.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:06:30 +0000 Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 6so729960ywa.0 for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:06:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=R2K68ycE+OE4uKd6lwOgRUIshjxwbnH/GklIe6vrm2w=; b=g2bmk63zhOBhEjX5HNP/713zpN4hPDCnGuBrYKqAK031jXwDuu2quMMWdUHAa4hokr Sd2wBgyaRea7P0V2OdFdUWipEd6UMRMsQwzUg40mRl4JiudcTotKoR9Mfb4U6w8np4MU P76NZ29SdCRgotGQenkgtEi2rmz5IzHOcD73I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=bp4rRoV5QdRpDmqa///k444P1XKzhl47XrC/Z0Y5rq16M4zQw9KE84QmMN+T8996ar gT1zkdEfmXkNG+XXxroxuJSmGriZ0jPQINS2mHtVR98CSLoMhr5J3K04MOzaQBEZ6Z77 Jmhd6nwyFzh1NXgF9lD/NOslBEG6gNhEGAy2Q= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id u12mr2099768ybj.236.1238760369487; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:06:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 07:06:09 -0500 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Subject: Re: Migration to Java 5 - Summary From: Jeremy Easton-Marks <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151751149ac90b1f0466a55f52 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --00151751149ac90b1f0466a55f52 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When are we proposing to make these changes? This release? A future point release? Or River 3.X? I think we should continue to work in 1.4 for this release unless anyone sees any immediate need for it. I am personally going to have difficulty selling the idea to my boss to use River if progress towards a full release out of hibernation is not done. Since upgrading to 1.5 or 1.6 can significantly change out code base I thin= k it would be best to wait for the next major release. At that point we can use a minimum of 1.5 and possible 1.6. On a completely different point. What are we doing about documentation, examples, and other things of that nature? Jeremy R. Easton-Marks "=C3=AAtre fort pour =C3=AAtre utile" On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Peter Firmstone <john56@example.net> wrote: > Just thought I'd go back over the messages and post a summary: > > Those in favour of using Java 6 features: > > Jeremy Easton-Marks > Greg Wonderly > James Grahn > > Those in favour of using Java 5 features: > > Dennis Reedy > Jim Waldo > Jonathan Costers > Greg Trasuk > Niclas Hedhman > Dan Rollo > Greg Wonderly > Jukka Zitting > Sean Landis > Peter Firmstone > James Grahn > > > Those who would like to see continued support for JRE 1.4 (bytecode only= , > using Retrotranslator): > > Patrick Wright > Greg Trasuk > Wade Chandler > Peter Firmstone > > > I propose posting the following items on Jira: > > 1. Migration to Java 5 Language Features and API > 2. Use of Generics in JavaSpace API, as suggested by James Grahn. > 3. Implementation of Retrotranslator for JRE 1.4 Runtime support. > > Best Regards, > > Peter Firmstone. > > Gregg Wonderly wrote: > >> James Grahn wrote: >> >>> Actually, Gregg, what I had in mind was this: >>> >>> public <T extends Entry> T read(T template, Transaction txn, long >>> timeout) >>> >> >> I always forget about that very handy way to restrict parameters and >> return values to the same type. That will be a useful way to help manag= e >> that the types are in the right hierarchy. >> >> Gregg Wonderly >> >> > > --00151751149ac90b1f0466a55f52-- From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 12:19:38 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 45244 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 12:19:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 12:19:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 29910 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 12:19:38 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 29865 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 12:19:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 29855 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 12:19:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:19:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f172.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:19:31 +0000 Received: by fxm20 with SMTP id 20so944113fxm.12 for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:19:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SjbZctyshLpS/3VuhELLV5pcwZ5n9JGO2oixMLdKrUA=; b=YoBsjwWVS6Qml37HXyLXoXc3aTEefht+DbovZyRRP4MLXxUZtu88Iy2sQjrzmN7SHk n3NWOh6XGYGuOhBkkofh65hZFbyREMX/joDPDnmDS9W+5Foz4w3kbtEAKHGXZbWWfy40 kjyDgGgjhga5TWOFYUVfJBjqlvBynEXjieeGM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=BnvWGxw4FmAtNWEPmCgJZ2VVrgg9V0em5s4wUa1TxV+sVSgZdE6nT57/e+PGsXvEvZ kph+UCTaLXqqGJrT11J46i0CkHbGq3JqssIdnFWayMdSrKEbv4NCd5Q0vQHfZqJib8dW fFjhvuIIAZadOyIGXvW+JJKcsNOMsOkdlUQAo= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 14:18:55 +0200 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id r3mr396384bkq.100.1238761150257; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Subject: Re: Migration to Java 5 - Summary From: Jukka Zitting <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Jeremy Easton-Marks <john56@example.net> wrote: > When are we proposing to make these changes? This release? A future point > release? Or River 3.X? I'm thinking about cutting AR2 fairly soon as the test integration that I was worried about earlier has been progressing very well. After that I'd propose that we do the package mapping to org.apache.river and upgrade to Java 5. The release numbering should bump to Apache River 3.0 to indicate these changes. > On a completely different point. What are we doing about documentation, > examples, and other things of that nature? We are looking forward to contributions from interested people. :-) BR, Jukka Zitting From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 12:43:05 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 56260 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 12:43:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 12:43:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 59937 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 12:43:05 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 59904 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 12:43:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 59894 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 12:43:05 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:43:05 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO fep3.cogeco.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 12:42:55 +0000 Received: from 83.161.120.155 (d221-84-217.commercial.cgocable.net [83.161.120.155]) by fep3.cogeco.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D2932EC for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 08:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Migration to Java 5 - Summary From: Greg Trasuk <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <1238167400.4140.248.camel@cameron> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso8859-1 Message-Id: <1238762389.2524.73.camel@cameron> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 83.161.120.1551c Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:39:49 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 07:47, Peter Firmstone wrote: > Just thought I'd go back over the messages and post a summary: > > Those in favour of using Java 6 features: > > Jeremy Easton-Marks > Greg Wonderly > James Grahn > > Those in favour of using Java 5 features: > > Dennis Reedy > Jim Waldo > Jonathan Costers > Greg Trasuk > Niclas Hedhman > Dan Rollo > Greg Wonderly > Jukka Zitting > Sean Landis > Peter Firmstone > James Grahn > > > Those who would like to see continued support for JRE 1.4 (bytecode > only, using Retrotranslator): > > Patrick Wright > Greg Trasuk I'm not in favour of using Retro-anything. I don't see the use case, and I get very nervous when people talk about back-porting stuff from Harmony's 1.5 implementation. Move on to Java 1.5 and be done with it. Greg Trasuk > Wade Chandler > Peter Firmstone > > > I propose posting the following items on Jira: > > 1. Migration to Java 5 Language Features and API > 2. Use of Generics in JavaSpace API, as suggested by James Grahn. > 3. Implementation of Retrotranslator for JRE 1.4 Runtime support. > > Best Regards, > > Peter Firmstone. > > Gregg Wonderly wrote: > > James Grahn wrote: > >> Actually, Gregg, what I had in mind was this: > >> > >> public <T extends Entry> T read(T template, Transaction txn, long > >> timeout) > > > > I always forget about that very handy way to restrict parameters and > > return values to the same type. That will be a useful way to help > > manage that the types are in the right hierarchy. > > > > Gregg Wonderly > > -- Greg Trasuk, President StratusCom Manufacturing Systems Inc. - We use information technology to solve business problems on your plant floor. http://stratuscom.com From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 18:06:16 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 23080 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 18:06:15 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 18:06:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 35113 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 18:00:33 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 35099 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 18:00:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Delivered-To: moderator for john56@example.net Received: (qmail 12025 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 15:42:45 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Migration to Java 5 - Summary Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 16:42:09 +0100 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Migration to Java 5 - Summary Thread-Index: Acm0V2aTNev/gOJ/QjeN3eEFyakeKQAGnpEg References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> From: "Tom Hobbs" <john56@example.net> To: <john56@example.net> X-MC-Unique: 109040316421002402 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="MCBoundary=_109040316421101902" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --MCBoundary=_109040316421101902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, This makes perfect sense to me. Before we start thinking up more ways to release AR2 lets take what we have and get it out - if nothing else it proves that there's still life in this project! :-) I'd also be tempted to call the package name changes and the move to Java[56] it for release 3.0. Both of those are big changes which will have big impacts on users existing code bases without adding more to the mix. > We are looking forward to contributions from interested people. What's the process for supplying extra documentation? Are Jiras raised/commented on or is it something else? Here I'm thinking of the wiki and editing rights. Cheers, Tom -----Original Message----- From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:john56@example.net]=20 Sent: 03 April 2009 13:19 To: john56@example.net Subject: Re: Migration to Java 5 - Summary Hi, On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Jeremy Easton-Marks <john56@example.net> wrote: > When are we proposing to make these changes? This release? A future point > release? Or River 3.X? I'm thinking about cutting AR2 fairly soon as the test integration that I was worried about earlier has been progressing very well. After that I'd propose that we do the package mapping to org.apache.river and upgrade to Java 5. The release numbering should bump to Apache River 3.0 to indicate these changes. > On a completely different point. What are we doing about documentation, > examples, and other things of that nature? We are looking forward to contributions from interested people. :-) BR, Jukka Zitting www.sucden.co.uk Sucden (UK) Limited, 5 London Bridge Street, London SE1 9SG Telephone 771-227-0043 =20 Registered in England no. 1095841 VAT registration no. GB 446 9061 33 Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and ente= red in the FSA register under no. 114239 This email, including any files transmitted with it, is confidential and ma= y be privileged. It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recip= ient. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify = john56@example.net immediately and delete it from your computer system= . We believe, but do not warrant, that this email and its attachments are vir= us-free, but you should check.=20 Sucden (UK) Ltd may monitor traffic data of both business and personal emai= ls. By replying to this email, you consent to Sucden=92s monitoring the con= tent of any emails you send to or receive from Sucden. Sucden is not liable= for any opinions expressed by the sender where this is a non-business emai= l. The contents of this e-mail do not constitute advice and should not be rega= rded as a recommendation to buy, sell or otherwise deal with any particular= investment. This message has been scanned for viruses by Mimecast. --MCBoundary=_109040316421101902-- From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Fri Apr 03 22:56:34 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 42986 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2009 22:56:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2009 22:56:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 5288 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 22:56:34 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 5243 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2009 22:56:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 5232 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2009 22:56:34 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:56:34 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of john56@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO fk-out-0910.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:56:27 +0000 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id z22so497662fkz.12 for <john56@example.net>; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:56:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:received:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sZodExcmInwT3Wqap0QoNgy4W5qOdi23obicb4Po7qA=; b=bX2cuAij6YUrgDR8K4dT9Tv2umMvEkUegZK+ethT2MYw41fkV2hvR53hAWyg3aYoZF BPDls8V2H3jVm/8y2TVnvEvT3umQv52n1UpdsfX9N/2WhHojorROaLDmj5LPNicJiXHN w57WI/GOywu7fWu8mvpJEAxmdip/Gi9QdtLLs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=adkcCDAKQMmvIARzdpv2fdRnwbdarrs4HsuPnAFd9CbrP21TNZzN9rx0kD8sQ0PnHS GwvSj/8ILC6F+075NRaNvTarY1g09gDYYe5DCsA0RiIfajZZ+m7SDxBX90aFVrV4TciE b64tM138cmrnUaCEpuxfBpw57DxGOxd72jjk8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 00:55:51 +0200 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id c10mr579948bkh.56.1238799366182; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:56:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Subject: Contributing documentation (Was: Migration to Java 5 - Summary) From: Jukka Zitting <john56@example.net> To: john56@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Tom Hobbs <john56@example.net> wrote: >> We are looking forward to contributions from interested people. > > What's the process for supplying extra documentation? =A0Are Jiras > raised/commented on or is it something else? =A0Here I'm thinking of the > wiki and editing rights. The official River web site can only be modified by committers, so you'll need to file Jira issues for any changes you want to see there. Of course, anyone who makes a few good contributions will be considered as a candidate for committership. And I just realized that we also have a more open River wiki space at http://wiki.apache.org/river/. There anyone can register a wiki account and start contributing documentation. Feel free to use the wiki space for any River or Jini -related topics. BR, Jukka Zitting From river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net Sat Apr 04 04:07:49 2009 Return-Path: <river-dev-returnjohn56@example.net> Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 21051 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2009 04:07:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Apr 2009 04:07:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 66987 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2009 04:07:48 -0000 Delivered-To: john56@example.net Received: (qmail 66902 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2009 04:07:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact john56@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:john56@example.net> List-Id: <river-dev.incubator.apache.org> Reply-To: john56@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list john56@example.net Received: (qmail 66892 invoked by uid 99); 4 Apr 2009 04:07:48 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 04:07:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nskntmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 04:07:40 +0000 Received: from nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com ([83.161.120.155]) by nskntmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <john56@example.net> for <john56@example.net>; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 04:07:18 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (really [83.161.120.155]) by nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090404040717.JSLJ20709.nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@[83.161.120.155]> for <john56@example.net>; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 04:07:17 +0000 Message-ID: <john56@example.net> Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 14:08:56 +1000 From: Peter Firmstone <john56@example.net> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (X11/20080531) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john56@example.net Subject: Migration to Java 5 - Summary Updated References: <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <1238167400.4140.248.camel@cameron> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> <john56@example.net> In-Reply-To: <john56@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.49D6DCF6.0090,ss=1,fgs=0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Just thought I'd go back over the messages and post a summary (with corrections): Those in favour of using Java 6 features: Jeremy Easton-Marks Greg Wonderly James Grahn Those in favour of using Java 5 features: Dennis Reedy Jim Waldo Jonathan Costers Greg Trasuk Niclas Hedhman Dan Rollo Greg Wonderly Jukka Zitting Sean Landis Peter Firmstone James Grahn Those who would like to see continued support for JRE 1.4 (bytecode only, using Retrotranslator): Patrick Wright Wade Chandler Peter Firmstone Those against continued support for JRE 1.4
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}