From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 3 06:20:18 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB64B16A417 for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 06:20:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-java@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A9C713C44B for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 06:20:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-java@m.gmane.org) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IcxaV-0004mT-5E for freebsd-java@freebsd.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:20:03 +0000 Received: from detroit.slack.net ([69.31.82.90]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:20:03 +0000 Received: from mark.evenson by detroit.slack.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:20:03 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org From: Mark Evenson Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 08:19:09 +0200 Lines: 30 Message-ID: <4703345D.5020204@gmx.at> References: <20071001100936.GA10202@rv-laptop> <20071002211357.GA48667@misty.eyesbeyond.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: detroit.slack.net User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070803) In-Reply-To: <20071002211357.GA48667@misty.eyesbeyond.com> Sender: news Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Removal of Java 1.1 and 1.2 support in the ports tree X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:20:18 -0000 Greg Lewis wrote: > G'day Mark, > > On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 11:17:19AM +0200, Mark Evenson wrote: > > Unless someone else comes forward saying they are using jdk11 today, I > don't see a statement of "this was useful for me 4 years ago" as being a > reason to keep an ancient version of Java around today :). Ouch. Yeah, it's reaching on my part: I just wanted to see if anyone else had maybe put this to use. [...] > > Basically, I think the removal of these ports will be going ahead unless > someone comes up with a Really Good [TM] reason not to. They're basically > just a maintenance burden at the moment. > > That being said, we're not removing the distribution files for jdk11, so > if someone desperately needs to use an 8 year old JDK they can still > download the binary, install compat3x and run it (assuming it does). Keeping the binary distribution kicking around would be more than enough for my (admittedly remotely possible) future needs. And I totally. understand wanting to remove administrative burden. -- "[T]his is not a disentanglement from, but a progressive knotting into."