It would appear from this small survey that there is a preference for
maintaining support for 1.4.I am sensitive to the additional work
required to code and test all new code against 1.4
It occurs to me that if we move to git then we can keep two branches
active. One branch would support 1.4 for backpatches and the other
branch would drop 1.4 support and new features would be developed on
that line.
Thoughts ?
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Steven Schlansker
<stevenschlansker@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 23, 2012, at 11:33 AM, David Johnston wrote:
>
>> The same kind of thinking goes toward officially supporting different JREs. Make efforts to maintain broad support
-though that technically means having these releases in the buildfarm - and address the pros/cons of specific features
thatare desirable but that cannot be used on all flavors.
>
> I'll toss in my 2¢ as a Postgres and Java advocate, and one-time patch submitter (which ended up getting abandoned
anyway). Weigh that as you will :-)
>
>
> Maintaining Java 1.4 compatibility was a significant barrier to me contributing a patch to the pg-JDBC driver. I may
bespoiled, but I write 1.6 code all day every day and being forced to drop back to 1.4 (especially when you have to
keeptrack of compatibility in your head, my machine doesn't even have a supported 1.4 install anymore, making it very
hardto test well!) really adds both a psychological and a time barrier to contributing code to the driver.
>
> As a user (and I do understand not everyone has the same values / needs), I would strongly prefer to see time spent
ondeveloping / shoring up new features and improvements (e.g. JDBC4 features) rather than maintaining support for
effectivelylegacy JVM versions.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
