* Omair Majid <omajid@xxxxxxxxxx> [2011-07-29 10:32]: > On 07/25/2011 04:04 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote: > >* Bill Nottingham<notting@xxxxxxxxxx> [2011-07-25 15:54]: > >>Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@xxxxxxxxx) said: > >>>Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted to > >>>allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has turned into > >>>anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that the Feature Owners > >>>must be willing to commit to doing all the work involved in coordination > >>>when they submit something late. In other words, if Java 7 update went in > >>>well before the feature deadline, the expectation would be that packagers > >>>whose packages depended on Java would need to adapt to Java 7. The > >>>expectation now that the Feature Freeze has passed is that the people > >>>pushing Java 7 into the repos would also need to seek out and fix all the > >>>packages that depend on them that are broken. > >> > >>Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7? > >> > > > >This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having > >only 7 in Fedora 16. > > > >If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most > >applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs > >(which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would > >be affected. That would likely be a small subset. > > Have you seen the list of incompatibilities? > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html > Thanks. I hadn't seen the full list, but I knew it'd fairly small given how much importance compatibility has been given in the past and for 7. Unfortunately it is not possible to gauge how much Fedora will be affected by that :/ My biggest concern would be for apps using sun.* APIs. As mentioned above though, it should be a small percentage. Cheers, Deepak -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
