Kedar,
The build wouldn't run correctly with JDK 5 recently (the
Configuration and Transactions stuff--Jerome told me to use 1.6). I
took that to mean 1.6 was required. Maybe the problem is now fixed?
I agree on the "public announcement" part.
Lloyd
On Oct 23, 2008, at 4:21 PM, Kedar Mhaswade wrote:
>> I thought we *required* JDK 1.6 for the trunk, so why is Hudson
>> using 1.5?
>> Am I not safe in assuming that I can use JDK 1.6 features?
>
> Unless there is a public announcement that we *must* build with JDK
> 1.6,
> I believe JDK 5 is the platform to *build* it with.
>
> I haven't seen any announcement yet.
>
>> If that's the case, then no JDK 6 features can be used (eg MXBeans
>> and various other things). If so, I see no choice but to remove
>> the @Override annotations.
>
> Well, in this particular case, it is just a coincidence as javac
> with JDK 1.5
> seems to have a bug that javac with JDK 1.6 has fixed. It's for the
> ability
> to build with JDK 1.5 that I suggested we remove the annotations.
>
> To build the product with JDK 1.6 is an entirely different and more
> heavyweight decision, IMO. Needless to say that a product built this
> way
> won't run with Java SE 5.0 JRE.