Re: [jgrapht-developers] JGraphT backport

[John V. S. <js...@gm...>]

I was going to do that, but then I thought:

- Once we have multiple versions, it's probably better to name them 
explicitly to avoid confusion.

- This isn't the only painful JDK upgrade in history (look at 1.1->1.2), 
and somehow I doubt it's the last one.  For the painless ones, we can 
just avoid bumping the version number; this will indicate backwards 
compatibility.

JVS

Barak Naveh wrote:
>>jgrapht-jdk1.4.jar (retrowoven version)
>>jgrapht-jdk1.5.jar (standard compile)
> 
>  
> Actually, the standard compile could be simply called 'jgrapht.jar' to avoid
> the naming convention becoming obsolete with the jdk1.6 release.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>