RE: [cdt-dev] HEAD is broken

["Schorn, Markus" <Markus.Schorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
I am the one that checked in the code containing the assert. It does
not require java 1.5, but it requires 1.4. 

Are you building with -source 1.3?
Markus.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Ryall
> Sent: Freitag, 30. Juni 2006 21:21
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] HEAD is broken
> 
> Doug,
> 
> Like some of the other folks we've been assuming that the 
> platform would
> move to 1.5 and CDT would follow. We would really like to see 
> CDT 4.0 move
> to 1.5, both so we can use the new language features and to minimize
> operational problems. Everything else we are doing is using 
> 1.5 and we would
> like to stop having to step backward to 1.4 when working in 
> CDT or on code
> that we think might later be contributed to CDT.
> 
> I don't think requiring 1.5 a year from now is unreasonable.
> 
> Thanks - Ken
> 
> > From: ext Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
> > Reply-To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:57:01 -0400
> > To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] HEAD is broken
> > 
> > Just talking to a couple of Platform people on 
> #eclipse-dev, there doesn't
> > seem to be a rush to move to 1.5 down there.
> > 
> > That doesn't prevent us as a community from deciding to 
> make the jump. But
> > we need to make sure we don't mess up anyone who can't move to 1.5.
> > 
> > So is there anyone who can't move? Or who want to make sure 
> that they can
> > keep running 1.4 in case it turns out they can't move?
> > 
> > I have no preference either way.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>