Re: [ormf-dev] Should we change our JVM requirement to Java 6

[Achim Loerke <Achim.Loerke@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just for your information, Steve Northover seems to believe that the 
Cocoa port will be available in the foreseeable future: 
http://inside-swt.blogspot.com/2008/09/back-to-work.html

Achim

Joel Rosi-Schwartz wrote:
> It appears that this is not going to fly. I forgot that OS X still does 
> not have a 32-bit Java 6 (only the 64-bit) and SWT on OS X is tied to 
> the 32-bit implementation. This is because SWT on OS X is built on top 
> of Carbon which is pure 32-bit. So until OS X SWT moves over to Cocoa or 
> someone delivers a 32-bit Java 6 for OS X we are stuck with Java 5. 
> Neither are likely to happen soon :-(  Apple is being as slow as 
> molasses with Java 6 and the Eclipse SWT team is in early stages for 
> Cocoa support with guesses being Eclipse 3.5 for release.
>
> Btw, I have tried SoyaLatte (OpenJDK) with no joy. Even if it did work I 
> would not be terribly comfortable with requiring all ORMF users on the 
> Mac to be required to use it.
>
> Sorry but I do not think that we should give up the Mac community over 
> this issues.
>
> So I vote: -1
>
> :-(
> Joel  
>
>
> On 8 Sep 2008, at 12:37, Chereches Vasile wrote:
>
> > Also a +1 for Java6.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Joel Rosi-Schwartz <Joel.Rosi-Schwartz@xxxxxxxxx 
> > <mailto:Joel.Rosi-Schwartz@xxxxxxxxx>>
> > To: The Open Requirements Management Framework project development 
> > list <ormf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ormf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> > Sent: Sunday, 7 September, 2008 18:10:30
> > Subject: [ormf-dev] Should we change our JVM requirement to Java 6
> >
> > We have a several problematic CQs because of our usage of JAX-WS 2.0 
> > when running under Java 5.  Seeing as JAX--WS comes out of the box 
> > with Java 6, if we moved our minimum JVM to 6 these could all be 
> > dropped. We still have to find a work around to the Java 6 bug 6741342 
> > <http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6741342> that is 
> > the root of our issue number 240579 
> > <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/process_bug.cgi>, but this must be 
> > addressed as a matter of priority in any case.
> >
> > Both Barbara and I are in favour of this move. Does anyone have any 
> > considerations?
> >
> > Joel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ormf-dev mailing list
> > ormf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ormf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ormf-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ormf-dev mailing list
> ormf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ormf-dev

--
BREDEX GmbH
Mauernstr. 33
38100 Braunschweig

Tel.: +49-531-24330-0
Fax:  +49-531-24330-99
http: www.bredex.de

Geschäftsführer: Hans-J. Brede, Achim Lörke, Ulrich Obst
Amtsgericht Braunschweig HRB 2450

begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:Achim L=C3=B6rke
n;quoted-printable:L=C3=B6rke;Achim
org:Bredex GmbH
adr;quoted-printable:;;Mauernstra=C3=9Fe 33;Braunschweig;;38100;Germany
email;internet:Achim.Loerke@xxxxxxxxx
tel;work:+49 (531) 24330-0
tel;fax:+49 (531) 24330-99
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.bredex.de/
version:2.1
end:vcard