Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK 1.3? 1.4? in the future)

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Hi all,

(including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach a wider audience)

I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2 in the next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states that Xerces supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built or tested binaries with this level. All of the recent releases were built and tested with JDK 1.3. It was brought to my attention that the code [2] since at least 2006 has had a dependency on APIs introduced in JDK 1.3. So we inadvertently moved on awhile ago. It seems this has not been a practical issue for most users since we've received no posts on these lists about it and received no other bug reports. It's not clear that there would be much benefit in restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at this point. It's been out of service for years and looking around Apache it seems most projects run on JDK 1.4 or higher with some of the stragglers [3][4] below that moving up soon.

If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2 support please send an email to the j-dev@... mailing list, specifying why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what parser features you are using.

While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from (e.g. NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining, java.lang.StringBuilder, java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not something I'm proposing today (or thinking of proposing for awhile) but would like to hear feedback from users (please send to j-dev@...) who may still need new versions of Xerces which run on JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear from folks who've long since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to see Xerces take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.

Thanks.

[1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
[2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
[3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
[4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

[Nathan Beyer-3]

+1

I'd suggest just jumping to Java 5 library, source and target
compilation. I think this would give the project a new infusion of
activity and interest.

-Nathan

On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 9:51 PM, Michael Glavassevich
<mrglavas@...> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> (including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach a wider
> audience)
>
> I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2 in the
> next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states that Xerces
> supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built or tested binaries
> with this level. All of the recent releases were built and tested with JDK
> 1.3. It was brought to my attention that the code [2] since at least 2006
> has had a dependency on APIs introduced in JDK 1.3. So we inadvertently
> moved on awhile ago. It seems this has not been a practical issue for most
> users since we've received no posts on these lists about it and received no
> other bug reports. It's not clear that there would be much benefit in
> restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at this point. It's been out of service for
> years and looking around Apache it seems most projects run on JDK 1.4 or
> higher with some of the stragglers [3][4] below that moving up soon.
>
> If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2 support
> please send an email to the j-dev@... mailing list, specifying
> why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what parser features you are
> using.
>
> While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us
> eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were
> features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from (e.g.
> NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining, java.lang.StringBuilder,
> java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not something I'm proposing today
> (or thinking of proposing for awhile) but would like to hear feedback from
> users (please send to j-dev@...) who may still need new
> versions of Xerces which run on JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear
> from folks who've long since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to
> see Xerces take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.
>
> Thanks.
>
> [1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
> [2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
> [3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
> [4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2
>
> Michael Glavassevich
> XML Parser Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
> E-mail: mrglavas@...
> E-mail: mrglavas@...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Schmidlin, Franck]

 > a new infusion of activity and interest.

you betcha, most of us would be up in arms!

I personally am stuck on 1.4.2 for the foreseeable future.

So +1 to drop 1.2/3 support, but let's not get too drastic please.


______________________________
Franck Schmidlin
Corporate Integration Consultant
Northgate Public Services

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail


-----Original Message-----
From: nbeyer@... [mailto:nbeyer@...] On Behalf Of Nathan
Beyer
Sent: 11 November 2008 02:25
To: j-users@...
Cc: j-dev@...; general@...
Subject: Re: Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK
1.3? 1.4? in the future)

+1

I'd suggest just jumping to Java 5 library, source and target
compilation. I think this would give the project a new infusion of
activity and interest.

-Nathan

On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 9:51 PM, Michael Glavassevich
<mrglavas@...> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> (including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach a
> wider
> audience)
>
> I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2 in

> the next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states that

> Xerces supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built or
> tested binaries with this level. All of the recent releases were built

> and tested with JDK 1.3. It was brought to my attention that the code
> [2] since at least 2006 has had a dependency on APIs introduced in JDK

> 1.3. So we inadvertently moved on awhile ago. It seems this has not
> been a practical issue for most users since we've received no posts on

> these lists about it and received no other bug reports. It's not clear

> that there would be much benefit in restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at

> this point. It's been out of service for years and looking around
> Apache it seems most projects run on JDK 1.4 or higher with some of
the stragglers [3][4] below that moving up soon.
>
> If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2
> support please send an email to the j-dev@... mailing
> list, specifying why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what
> parser features you are using.
>
> While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us
> eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were
> features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from
(e.g.
> NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining,
> java.lang.StringBuilder, java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not
> something I'm proposing today (or thinking of proposing for awhile)
> but would like to hear feedback from users (please send to
> j-dev@...) who may still need new versions of Xerces
> which run on JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear from folks
> who've long since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to see
Xerces take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.

>
> Thanks.
>
> [1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
> [2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
> [3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
> [4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2
>
> Michael Glavassevich
> XML Parser Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
> E-mail: mrglavas@...
> E-mail: mrglavas@...

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: j-dev-help@...



 Scanned for viruses by BlackSpider MailControl


This email is sent on behalf of Northgate Information Solutions Limited and its associated companies ("Northgate") and is strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee(s).  

 If you are not the intended recipient of this email you must: (i) not disclose, copy or distribute its contents to any other person nor use its contents in any way or you may be acting unlawfully; (ii) contact Northgate immediately on [phone] quoting the name of the sender and the addressee then delete it from your system.

 Northgate has taken reasonable precautions to ensure that no viruses are contained in this email, but does not accept any responsibility once this email has been transmitted.  You should scan attachments (if any) for viruses.

 Northgate Information Solutions Limited. Registered in England no. 06442582  -  Northgate Information Solutions UK Limited. Registered in England no. 968498  -  NorthgateArinso UK Limited. Registered in England no. 1587537  -  Moorepay Limited.  Registered in England no. 891686  -  Northgate Land & Property Solutions Limited  -  Registered in England no. 2149536 Registered Office: Peoplebuilding 2, Peoplebuilding Estate, Maylands Avenue, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire HP2 4NW

 Northgate Managed Services Limited (NI).  Registered in Northern Ireland no. NI032979  -  LearnServe Limited (NI).  Registered in Northern Ireland no. NI043825 Registered Office: Hillview House, 61 Church Road, Newtownabbey, Co. Antrim, BT36 7LQ

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Shane Curcuru-2]

+1 to dropping 1.2 support.

Please - be sure that the main website clearly lists the last release we
think that Xerces worked on JDK version x.y.  Xerces is ubiquitous, and
is used directly or within other products virtually everywhere.  While
we don't need to spend developer time worrying about ancient JDK
versions, we should make it clear where people who have to stay on
legacy systems can get an appropriate release.

I'd love it if we ensured that we feature a prominent link and host the
download for the zip/targz plus it's key file for "the last known good
Xerces with JDK x.y" as we drop support for earlier releases.

Thanks for bringing the item up!

- Shane

[sebb-2-2]

On 11/11/2008, Shane Curcuru <asf@...> wrote:
> +1 to dropping 1.2 support.

+1 to dropping 1.2

+0 to dropping 1.3

I think 1.4 support should be kept if possible for a while yet.

>  Please - be sure that the main website clearly lists the last release we
> think that Xerces worked on JDK version x.y.  Xerces is ubiquitous, and is
> used directly or within other products virtually everywhere.  While we don't
> need to spend developer time worrying about ancient JDK versions, we should
> make it clear where people who have to stay on legacy systems can get an
> appropriate release.

+1

>  I'd love it if we ensured that we feature a prominent link and host the
> download for the zip/targz plus it's key file for "the last known good
> Xerces with JDK x.y" as we drop support for earlier releases.
>

+1

>  Thanks for bringing the item up!
>
>  - Shane
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Jeremias Maerki-2]

On 11.11.2008 14:52:52 sebb wrote:
> On 11/11/2008, Shane Curcuru <asf@...> wrote:
> > +1 to dropping 1.2 support.
>
> +1 to dropping 1.2
>
> +0 to dropping 1.3
>
> I think 1.4 support should be kept if possible for a while yet.

Agreed. Xerces is such a basic library and so many companies are still
stuck with Java 1.4 even though it's past EOL.

> >  Please - be sure that the main website clearly lists the last release we
> > think that Xerces worked on JDK version x.y.  Xerces is ubiquitous, and is
> > used directly or within other products virtually everywhere.  While we don't
> > need to spend developer time worrying about ancient JDK versions, we should
> > make it clear where people who have to stay on legacy systems can get an
> > appropriate release.
>
> +1
>
> >  I'd love it if we ensured that we feature a prominent link and host the
> > download for the zip/targz plus it's key file for "the last known good
> > Xerces with JDK x.y" as we drop support for earlier releases.
> >
>
> +1
>
> >  Thanks for bringing the item up!
> >
> >  - Shane
> >
> >

Jeremias Maerki


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Ludger Buenger]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Before Advancing beyond 1.3 I’d suggest to maybe initiate a usage poll analogous to http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007 to get an overview which JDK version is still in use and required by Xerces-J users.

 

That would give the community a foundation to base a good decision upon.

 

 

From: Michael Glavassevich [mailto:mrglavas@...]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 4:52 AM
To: j-dev@...; j-users@...
Cc: general@...
Subject: Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK 1.3? 1.4? in the future)

 

Hi all,

(including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach a wider audience)

I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2 in the next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states that Xerces supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built or tested binaries with this level. All of the recent releases were built and tested with JDK 1.3. It was brought to my attention that the code [2] since at least 2006 has had a dependency on APIs introduced in JDK 1.3. So we inadvertently moved on awhile ago. It seems this has not been a practical issue for most users since we've received no posts on these lists about it and received no other bug reports. It's not clear that there would be much benefit in restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at this point. It's been out of service for years and looking around Apache it seems most projects run on JDK 1.4 or higher with some of the stragglers [3][4] below that moving up soon.

If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2 support please send an email to the j-dev@... mailing list, specifying why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what parser features you are using.

While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from (e.g. NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining, java.lang.StringBuilder, java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not something I'm proposing today (or thinking of proposing for awhile) but would like to hear feedback from users (please send to j-dev@...) who may still need new versions of Xerces which run on JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear from folks who've long since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to see Xerces take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.

Thanks.

[1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
[2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
[3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
[4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

--
This message was scanned by ESVA and is believed to be clean.
Click here to report this message as spam.

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Xerces doesn't have maintenance releases in the sense that we'll ever have a 2.[x].y release after a 2.[x+1].0. The codebase is constantly moving forward with new development. It just happens that over some periods of time the only changes were bug fixes and minor improvements and if we have a release before something significant hits the trunk it ends up being a point release instead of the next in the series of 2.x. With the limited resources we have on the project (I find myself with less and less time for Xerces each year; the other developers have less than that) I'd say -1 to creating and maintaining branches ahead of time for hypothetical maintenance releases we may never have. I remember someone asking for a branch for JDK 1.1 based releases when we dropped support for that level. The need to have such releases never materialized. If there were to be a compelling reason to have one in the future the tags from the previous Xerces releases will always be there and we could create a branch from them if necessary. If it's just for the benefit of a handful of users (namely the individuals asking for the release) I would expect them to chip in in some way with patches and/or testing. If they really need it they'll help. If they're not willing to lift a finger then they don't need it badly enough yet.

As for moving past Java 1.3, it's not just the features we could be using from later JDKs to improve the code and the user base still on old JDKs which would factor into a decision. I would expect a future version of JAXP [1] is going to start using generics [2] and APIs only available in Java 5 and beyond. So it may get to a point where Xerces just has to jump to Java 5, 6 or ??? in order to keep up with JAXP. This already happened to JAXB. The 2.0 version of that spec is impossible to implement and use without Java 5. As some of you know we're currently working on an implementation of XML Schema 1.1 and one of the significant features introduced in this new version of XML Schema is assertions [3]. For this feature to be of value to users you basically need a full-blown XPath 2.0 evaluator. Most likely we're going to have to rely on another processor for the XPath support and that other library may have a dependency on a later version of Java. So there are other things which could push Xerces past Java 1.3 and those may be coming sooner than some folks can move to later JDKs.

Anyway, in the immediate future I only recommend that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2. So far the folks who've been responding seem to be on board with that.

Thanks.

[1] http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=JaxpNextDiscussion
[2] http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6472193
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/#cAssertions

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

nbeyer@... wrote on 11/11/2008 09:46:52 PM:

> I doubt maintenance for the current codebase running on Java 1.3 would
> be completely removed. I interpreted the original question as aimed at
> new and future development. I don't want to speak for Michael, but
> that's the way I read it.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:08 AM, Jacob Kjome <hoju@...> wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:36:26 -0500
> >  "David Ezell" <David_E3@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, one person's 4 is another person's 3.
> >>
> >> We're stuck on 1.3 for the foreseeable future.
> >>
> >> So -1 to drop 1.3.
> >
> > I partially agree with this.  There's no reason 1.3 needs to be dropped for
> > the current 2.x.x codebase.  Why not maintain 2.x.x at 1.3 and move on to
> > 3.x development which would be 1.5+ (or even 1.6+).  Xerces2 is very
> > stable.  1.3 and 1.4 users can continue to depend on it.  I maintain the
> > XMLC project, which is currently limited to JDK 1.3 anway.  If critical
> > issues are found in Xerces2, they can be fixed on the Xerces2 branch where
> > 1.3 and 1.4 users can benefit.  Of course, we can also expect that 1.3 and
> > 1.4 users are in maintenance mode and won't require fancy new features.  All
> > new feature development can take place on the trunk, which will represent
> > the Xerces3 codebase, and will be able to take advantage of all the latest
> > JDK features.  Who knows, maybe Sun can eventually drop the
> > com.sun.apache.xerces stuff and migrate back to the original, stable, Xerces
> > product once it is not limited by old VM's.
> >
> > Jake
> >
> >>
> >> David Ezell
> >> VeriFone
> >> Chair, XML Schema WG
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Schmidlin, Franck [Franck.Schmidlin@...] Sent:
> >>> Tuesday, November 11, 2008 5:35 AM
> >>> To: j-dev@...; j-users@...
> >>> Cc: general@...
> >>> Subject: RE: Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK 1.3?
> >>> 1.4? in the future)
> >>>
> >>>  > a new infusion of activity and interest.
> >>>
> >>> you betcha, most of us would be up in arms!
> >>>
> >>> I personally am stuck on 1.4.2 for the foreseeable future.
> >>>
> >>> So +1 to drop 1.2/3 support, but let's not get too drastic please.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ______________________________
> >>> Franck Schmidlin
> >>> Corporate Integration Consultant
> >>> Northgate Public Services
> >>>
> >>> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: nbeyer@... [nbeyer@...] On Behalf Of Nathan
> >>> Beyer
> >>> Sent: 11 November 2008 02:25
> >>> To: j-users@...
> >>> Cc: j-dev@...; general@...
> >>> Subject: Re: Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK 1.3?
> >>> 1.4? in the future)
> >>>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> I'd suggest just jumping to Java 5 library, source and target
> >>> compilation. I think this would give the project a new infusion
> of activity
> >>> and interest.
> >>>
> >>> -Nathan
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 9:51 PM, Michael Glavassevich
> >>> <mrglavas@...> wrote:
> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> >
> >>> > (including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach a >
> >>> > wider
> >>> > audience)
> >>> >
> >>> > I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2 in
> >>>
> >>> > the next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states that
> >>>
> >>> > Xerces supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built or >
> >>> > tested binaries with this level. All of the recent releases were built
> >>>
> >>> > and tested with JDK 1.3. It was brought to my attention that the code >
> >>> > [2] since at least 2006 has had a dependency on APIs introduced in JDK
> >>>
> >>> > 1.3. So we inadvertently moved on awhile ago. It seems this has not >
> >>> > been a practical issue for most users since we've received no posts on
> >>>
> >>> > these lists about it and received no other bug reports. It's not clear
> >>>
> >>> > that there would be much benefit in restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at
> >>>
> >>> > this point. It's been out of service for years and looking around >
> >>> > Apache it seems most projects run on JDK 1.4 or higher with some of
> >>> the stragglers [3][4] below that moving up soon.
> >>> >
> >>> > If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2 >
> >>> > support please send an email to the j-dev@...
> mailing > list,
> >>> > specifying why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what > parser
> >>> > features you are using.
> >>> >
> >>> > While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us >
> >>> > eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were >
> >>> > features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from
> >>> (e.g.
> >>> > NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining, >
> >>> > java.lang.StringBuilder, java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not >
> >>> > something I'm proposing today (or thinking of proposing for
> awhile) > but
> >>> > would like to hear feedback from users (please send to
> >>> > j-dev@...) who may still need new versions of Xerces >
> >>> > which run on JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear from
> folks > who've
> >>> > long since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to see
> >>> Xerces take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.
> >>> >
> >>> > Thanks.
> >>> >
> >>> > [1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
> >>> > [2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
> >>> > [3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
> >>> > [4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2
> >>> >
> >>> > Michael Glavassevich
> >>> > XML Parser Development
> >>> > IBM Toronto Lab
> >>> > E-mail: mrglavas@...
> >>> > E-mail: mrglavas@...
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-dev-unsubscribe@...
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: j-dev-help@...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  Scanned for viruses by BlackSpider MailControl
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This email is sent on behalf of Northgate Information Solutions Limited
> >>> and its associated companies ("Northgate") and is strictly
> confidential and
> >>> intended solely for the addressee(s).
> >>>  If you are not the intended recipient of this email you must: (i) not
> >>> disclose, copy or distribute its contents to any other person nor use its
> >>> contents in any way or you may be acting unlawfully; (ii)
> contact Northgate
> >>> immediately on [phone] quoting the name of the sender and the
> >>> addressee then delete it from your system.
> >>>
> >>>  Northgate has taken reasonable precautions to ensure that no viruses are
> >>> contained in this email, but does not accept any responsibility once this
> >>> email has been transmitted.  You should scan attachments (if any) for
> >>> viruses.
> >>>
> >>>  Northgate Information Solutions Limited. Registered in England no.
> >>> 06442582  -  Northgate Information Solutions UK Limited. Registered in
> >>> England no. 968498  -  NorthgateArinso UK Limited. Registered in
> England no.
> >>> 1587537  -  Moorepay Limited.  Registered in England no. 891686  -
> >>>  Northgate Land & Property Solutions Limited  -  Registered in England no.
> >>> 2149536 Registered Office: Peoplebuilding 2, Peoplebuilding
> Estate, Maylands
> >>> Avenue, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire HP2 4NW
> >>>  Northgate Managed Services Limited (NI).  Registered in Northern Ireland
> >>> no. NI032979  -  LearnServe Limited (NI).  Registered in Northern Ireland
> >>> no. NI043825 Registered Office: Hillview House, 61 Church Road,
> >>> Newtownabbey, Co. Antrim, BT36 7LQ
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-users-unsubscribe@...
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: j-users-help@...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-users-unsubscribe@...
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: j-users-help@...
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-users-unsubscribe@...
> > For additional commands, e-mail: j-users-help@...
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: j-users-help@...

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Worth nothing that although Java 1.4 may have passed Sun's EOL date there are other JDK vendors who may have end of service dates that are still in the future. So it may be that a user who is still stuck on that JDK level is still getting support and bug fixes that they wouldn't be getting anymore for the Sun version. I wouldn't assume that the eventual releases out of Apache Harmony would bind themselves to Sun's dates either (for when they'd stop maintenance).

Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

Jeremias Maerki <dev@...> wrote on 11/11/2008 08:59:38 AM:

> On 11.11.2008 14:52:52 sebb wrote:
> > On 11/11/2008, Shane Curcuru <asf@...> wrote:
> > > +1 to dropping 1.2 support.
> >
> > +1 to dropping 1.2
> >
> > +0 to dropping 1.3
> >
> > I think 1.4 support should be kept if possible for a while yet.
>
> Agreed. Xerces is such a basic library and so many companies are still
> stuck with Java 1.4 even though it's past EOL.
>
> > >  Please - be sure that the main website clearly lists the last release we
> > > think that Xerces worked on JDK version x.y.  Xerces is ubiquitous, and is
> > > used directly or within other products virtually everywhere.  
> While we don't
> > > need to spend developer time worrying about ancient JDK
> versions, we should
> > > make it clear where people who have to stay on legacy systems can get an
> > > appropriate release.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > >  I'd love it if we ensured that we feature a prominent link and host the
> > > download for the zip/targz plus it's key file for "the last known good
> > > Xerces with JDK x.y" as we drop support for earlier releases.
> > >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > >  Thanks for bringing the item up!
> > >
> > >  - Shane
>
> Jeremias Maerki
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Any idea how this poll was done? A form you could submit on a website? Jeremias, seeing your name as the last editor on the Wiki I'm guessing you had something to do with it. Was this poll easy to set up?

Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

"Ludger Buenger" <ludger.buenger@...> wrote on 11/11/2008 09:34:08 AM:

> Before Advancing beyond 1.3 I’d suggest to maybe initiate a usage
> poll analogous to http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007
> to get an overview which JDK version is still in use and required by
> Xerces-J users.
>  
> That would give the community a foundation to base a good decision upon.
>  
>  
> From: Michael Glavassevich [mrglavas@...]
> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 4:52 AM
> To: j-dev@...; j-users@...
> Cc: general@...
> Subject: Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK 1.
> 3? 1.4? in the future)
>  
> Hi all,
>
> (including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach
> a wider audience)
>
> I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2
> in the next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states
> that Xerces supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built
> or tested binaries with this level. All of the recent releases were
> built and tested with JDK 1.3. It was brought to my attention that
> the code [2] since at least 2006 has had a dependency on APIs
> introduced in JDK 1.3. So we inadvertently moved on awhile ago. It
> seems this has not been a practical issue for most users since we've
> received no posts on these lists about it and received no other bug
> reports. It's not clear that there would be much benefit in
> restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at this point. It's been out of
> service for years and looking around Apache it seems most projects
> run on JDK 1.4 or higher with some of the stragglers [3][4] below
> that moving up soon.
>
> If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2
> support please send an email to the j-dev@... mailing
> list, specifying why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what
> parser features you are using.
>
> While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us
> eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were
> features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from
> (e.g. NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining, java.lang.
> StringBuilder, java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not something
> I'm proposing today (or thinking of proposing for awhile) but would
> like to hear feedback from users (please send to j-dev@xerces.
> apache.org) who may still need new versions of Xerces which run on
> JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear from folks who've long
> since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to see Xerces
> take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.
>
> Thanks.
>
> [1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
> [2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
> [3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
> [4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2
>
> Michael Glavassevich
> XML Parser Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
> E-mail: mrglavas@...
> E-mail: mrglavas@...
>
> --
> This message was scanned by ESVA and is believed to be clean.
> Click here to report this message as spam.

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Shane Curcuru <asf@...> wrote on 11/11/2008 08:08:50 AM:

> +1 to dropping 1.2 support.
>
> Please - be sure that the main website clearly lists the last release we
> think that Xerces worked on JDK version x.y.  Xerces is ubiquitous, and
> is used directly or within other products virtually everywhere.  While
> we don't need to spend developer time worrying about ancient JDK
> versions, we should make it clear where people who have to stay on
> legacy systems can get an appropriate release.

There's already an FAQ [1] and release notes [2] which say where we moved from JDK 1.1 to 1.2. We'll just add to it.

> I'd love it if we ensured that we feature a prominent link and host the
> download for the zip/targz plus it's key file for "the last known good
> Xerces with JDK x.y" as we drop support for earlier releases.

If someone wants to pick up an old version they will always be in the archives [3].

> Thanks for bringing the item up!
>
> - Shane

Thanks.

[1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
[2] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/releases.html
[3] http://archive.apache.org/dist/xml/xerces-j/

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

[Jeremias Maerki-2]

Yes, Michael, I was the driving force behind that. I wanted to make sure
that we've made an informed decision before dropping support for one JDK
or another. Developers obviously like the new stuff but users are
sometimes stuck with old stuff. It often takes them a bit longer to
migrate although they usually skip a generation when they migrate.

Anyway. First, we talked about the questions we wanted to ask:
http://markmail.org/message/y6h6lfzcupbvuww3
Then I set up the survey with one of the online survey service providers.
I chose one that was free.
http://markmail.org/message/xz72bqpkqy6dg5l5
At the end of the survey, I downloaded the data and visualized selected
items with OpenOffice. All put together that resulted in the Wiki page
mentioned by Ludger Buenger:
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007

I believe this survey, though took some time and effort to do, was worth
it and it wasn't difficult to do. And I'll push for one again when we
want to drop Java 1.4 support within the XML Graphics project. I expect
it won't take too long until we do another as Java 1.4 has reached EOL
last month. It's going to be interesting to see how the survey results
change over time. But given the small data base, don't assume the
results are 100% representative.

HTH

On 12.11.2008 06:42:33 Michael Glavassevich wrote:

>
> Any idea how this poll was done? A form you could submit on a website?
> Jeremias, seeing your name as the last editor on the Wiki I'm guessing you
> had something to do with it. Was this poll easy to set up?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Michael Glavassevich
> XML Parser Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
> E-mail: mrglavas@...
> E-mail: mrglavas@...
>
> "Ludger Buenger" <ludger.buenger@...> wrote on 11/11/2008
> 09:34:08 AM:
>
> > Before Advancing beyond 1.3 I?d suggest to maybe initiate a usage
> > poll analogous to http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/UserPollOct2007
> > to get an overview which JDK version is still in use and required by
> > Xerces-J users.
> >
> > That would give the community a foundation to base a good decision upon.
> >
> >
> > From: Michael Glavassevich [mailto:mrglavas@...]
> > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 4:52 AM
> > To: j-dev@...; j-users@...
> > Cc: general@...
> > Subject: Dropping JDK 1.2 support for Xerces-J (and possibly JDK 1.
> > 3? 1.4? in the future)
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > (including general@... on the cc list to hopefully reach
> > a wider audience)
> >
> > I would like to propose that we officially drop support for JDK 1.2
> > in the next release of Xerces-J. Though the documentation [1] states
> > that Xerces supports JDK 1.2 it has been years since we have built
> > or tested binaries with this level. All of the recent releases were
> > built and tested with JDK 1.3. It was brought to my attention that
> > the code [2] since at least 2006 has had a dependency on APIs
> > introduced in JDK 1.3. So we inadvertently moved on awhile ago. It
> > seems this has not been a practical issue for most users since we've
> > received no posts on these lists about it and received no other bug
> > reports. It's not clear that there would be much benefit in
> > restoring JDK 1.2 compatibility at this point. It's been out of
> > service for years and looking around Apache it seems most projects
> > run on JDK 1.4 or higher with some of the stragglers [3][4] below
> > that moving up soon.
> >
> > If you have serious concerns regarding Xerces abandoning JDK 1.2
> > support please send an email to the j-dev@... mailing
> > list, specifying why you can't use a higher level of JDK and what
> > parser features you are using.
> >
> > While on the subject I wonder what the community would think of us
> > eventually dropping support for JDK 1.3 and possibly 1.4. There were
> > features introduced in JDK 1.4 and 5 which Xerces could benefit from
> > (e.g. NIO, java.lang.CharSequence, exception chaining, java.lang.
> > StringBuilder, java.util.concurrent.*, etc...). That's not something
> > I'm proposing today (or thinking of proposing for awhile) but would
> > like to hear feedback from users (please send to j-dev@xerces.
> > apache.org) who may still need new versions of Xerces which run on
> > JDK 1.3 and 1.4. It would also be nice hear from folks who've long
> > since moved on to Java 5 and beyond and would like to see Xerces
> > take advantage of JDK 1.4 and 5 features.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > [1] http://xerces.apache.org/xerces2-j/faq-general.html#faq-11
> > [2] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESJ-1297
> > [3] http://marc.info/?l=ant-dev&m=122596549809889&w=2
> > [4] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=119244442600564&w=2
> >
> > Michael Glavassevich
> > XML Parser Development
> > IBM Toronto Lab
> > E-mail: mrglavas@...
> > E-mail: mrglavas@...
> >
> > --
> > This message was scanned by ESVA and is believed to be clean.
> > Click here to report this message as spam.

Jeremias Maerki


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...