2 ms·
> allowing us to support just one version at a time. On the flipside, each program has to maintain the whole stack themselves, and have to push out security up
by creshal 11y ago
> allowing us to support just one version at a time.
On the flipside, each program has to maintain the whole stack themselves, and have to push out security updates if necessary. I'm not sure this is an improvement over Java's security situation…
- leolanzinger 11y agodidn't get your point honestly
- mpitt 11y agoI see it like this: 1) let the user handle the security updates of the JVM; 2) push out security updates in a centralised, controlled fashion. IMHO, in a corporate solution like that described in the OP, 2) makes a lot more sense.