Received: by 10.68.202.68 with SMTP id kg4mr1132750pbc.3.1351711629026; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.240.103 with SMTP id vz7mr11792442pbc.10.1351711628871; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!kr7no27427954pbb.0!news-out.google.com!6ni51771pbd.1!nntp.google.com!kt20no27205175pbb.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:27:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <50909cbb$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.28.149.29; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.28.149.29 References: <509091c3$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <1umsl7d6nnwzq$.z9kssxet9o8f.dlg@40tude.net> <50909cbb$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Apache Commons abandoned ? From: Lew Injection-Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 19:27:09 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:19577 Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: > Joerg Meier wrote: >> Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: >>> I do not see running on Java 1.2 as a problem. It was probably started >>> when 1.2 was relevant and why break the capability if not needed. >=20 >> Running on Java of course is not a problem in and of itself, but softwar= e >> being specifically tailored to run on 1.2 kind of seems like it's pretty >> ancient. "Seems" is such a weasel word. Who does the "seeming"? It *seems* like=20 you're trying to avoid responsibility for your judgment. And it *seems* like you ignored that the library was updated for Java 5=20 compatibility, undercutting your very assumption. > If you have some software that was started 10 years ago and back then > it was decided to support 1.2, then it makes sense to keep that support > if there are no significant gain by dropping it. >=20 > Being backwards compatible unless very good reasons exists for not > being it is not ancient. >=20 >>> Apache Commons Configurations do have recent updates: >> >> Yeah, in this case I was referring to it's [sic] dependencies (lang 2.6,= which is >> the 1.2 version, instead of lang 3.1, last updated in January 2011, >> collections, last updated in April 2008, and logging, last updated in 20= 07,=20 >> almost 5 years ago). Why are you so scared of something not updated in a while? Rapid updates are not a bellwether of good quality. > Are there any inventions in collections or logging since 2008/2007 that > you miss? Is there anything preventing you from using the packages under Java 7 with= =20 the latest Collections library? --=20 Lew