On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Mark Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Peter W. Draper wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Norman Gray wrote:
> >
> > > I propose we revert to using JDK 1.4.1 until either JDK1.4.3 comes out
> > > or else there's an update to Xalan and there's a reasonable way to
> > > alter the Xalan that runs with JDK1.4.2.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> >
> > Hi Norman,
> >
> > it does seem that there's no way around this one. One thing I'm not
> > totally clear about, are there any application-level problems that are a
> > consequence of this? If so we'd better back out to 1.4.1.
>
> being lucky enough not to have code affected by this, I don't really
> care which java version we use, but on the whole I incline to sticking
> with a version that works rather than having the latest one for
> the sake of it (though where possible/easy we should get our code
> working for a variety of sensible JVMs). So rolling back to 1.4.1
> seems like sense to me, unless we had a compelling motivation for
> moving to 1.4.2 - did we?
No more than any other time, to quote SUN:
"There are several key bug fixes in this release. Sun strongly
recommends that users upgrade."
There are 2400+ bug fixes in this release!
Yet again SUN claims that this is the fastest JVM ever, and wrote a
document to prove it this time:
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/1.4.2_whitepaper.html
so unless there's a good reason (which Norman may have found) we should
always plan to play version catchup, in good time before a release I add
quickly.
Cheers (and apologies for going on),
Peter.
|