Rob is right as I see it. We also lost focus in the discussion trying to =
resolve the JDK version problem. The mission statement was the first =
step in getting the cooperation organised. At some stage we can surely =
switch to JDK 1.4. We will discuss this internally.
James and myself had in Noordwijk the idea to start working together on =
a common abstract data model (based on ISO 19107, perhaps ISO 19109, =
GAIA and the GML model). This should be more or less independent of a =
JDK version and give us a start.
Von: Rob Hranac [mailto:robhranac@...]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. September 2002 17:06
Betreff: [Geotools-devel] jdk version
I think that there is a middle ground to be found here: at some point,
Deegree will move away from JDK 1.3, correct? If this is a true
statement, then perhaps we can just plan our efforts so that when that
happens, they will take advantage of the GeoTools core. The Degree
people can start exploring the code beforehand, etc. Maybe they can set
some sort of internal deadline for the switchover and let GeoTools know.
Porting all of our code back to 1.3 could be done, but I agree with Ian
and Martin that it would be excessively painful. We are still being
slowed by our switchover from Log4J to 1.4 logging, I hate to think of
the time we would spend switching JDKs.
Sponsored by: AMD - Your access to the experts on Hammer Technology!=20
Open Source & Linux Developers, register now for the AMD Developer=20
Symposium. Code: EX8664 http://www.developwithamd.com/developerlab
Geotools-devel mailing list