Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> I think in this "special" case we can remove the jisp 
> support. Remember there were problems using jisp. So, I think 
> even users using deprecated stuff should avoid using jisp, if 
> they expect stability. And at least, we cannot also update 
> the jar because of the new GPL. Then we have only 2
> options:
> 
> 1-Stay with the buggy code, even when we know about that or...
> 2-Remove the buggy code. Currently, we have 2 new cache solutions.
> 
> I will prefer (2).
> 
> Do you think we need a vote for that? Or to request users 
> feedback (in users mailist)?
> 
No, I don't think we need a vote - just do what you think is best :)
But I agree, that we can remove the code in this case - we too many
cache solutions anyway.

Carsten

Reply via email to