Ken Cavanaugh wrote:
> kedar mhaswade wrote:
>> नमस्ते! (It is "Salut" in Samskritam :))
>>
>> But then wouldn't it mean we can't use JDK-6 specific API/implementation?
>>
>> I agree, there is a maintenance overhead here.
>>
>> Although I fully understand supporting JDK5, shouldn't we encourage
>> users to upgrade to JDK6 soon?
>>
> How do you do that? It's clear that GlassFish v3 next will only run on
> JDK 6 and later, because of the Java EE
> spec alignment issue. But customers take a VERY long time to migrate to
> the latest JDK. JDK 5 won't even
> be EOL'd until October this year. Maintaining a separate branch for JDK
> 6 is too much overhead.
> I'd hate to impact Grizzly community adoption just for the sake of
> moving to JDK 6.
>
> We MIGHT consider moving to JDK 6 as the minimum for Grizzly 2.0, which
> will probably be in
> GlassFish v3.next.next release (why can't we construct a roadmap with
> sensible release designations :-( ? )
I agree. This is a problem. I wouldn't want anyone to move to JDK 6 just
for the sake of it. My intent was for us to use JDK-6 niceties (which I
hear are mostly performance related) in Grizzly code/runtime.
I am less worried about GlassFish integration of Grizzly, mainly because
anything compiled with JDK 5 will run smoothly on JDK/JRE 6 (which is the
minimum version JRE version for GlassFish v3 runtime). It was mainly for
Grizzly runtime to get benefited by JDK 6 performance/API enhancements.
In general, JDK team does a great job of backporting the JDK 6 fixes to
JDK-5 patches, so, if this is not a major concern, I have no problems.
-Kedar
>
> Ken.