accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] ACCUMULO-905 (jdk7)
Date Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:30:05 GMT
Clarification on javadocs, the generated 1.5.1 javadocs were not vulnerable
and required no patching.

That said, I'm still in favor of bumping to jdk7.
On Mar 28, 2014 11:36 AM, "Christopher" <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

> I want to bump the minimum supported version of Java to 7 for the next
> version after the 1.6.x series. (Currently, this is tracked in JIRA as
> 1.7.0, and the master branch in git).
>
> We've discussed this in detail for 1.5.0 and 1.6.0, and it has been
> postponed for various reasons. I'd rather not rehash those discussions
> in detail, but I really think it's time to do it. So, if you have a
> serious objection that you think is still valid, and would warrant
> delaying further, I'd like to hear it.
>
> FYI, JDK6 reached EOL over a year ago, and JDK7 will reach EOL next
> year around this time. Some Linux distributions aren't even planning
> to provide JDK7 in their repos, and provide only JDK8 (just released),
> because it's expected to EOL within their support lifecycle. It'd be
> nice to develop newer versions on a modern Linux OS without jumping
> through hoops. JDK7 has been available in CentOS/RHEL for some time
> now, and I'd be surprised if RHEL7 (still in beta) included JRE6 at
> all.
>
> Plus, now there's the known javadoc6 vulnerabilities which require us
> patching javadocs before putting on the website (which we don't do for
> the javadoc jars, because they build with JDK6, so they would be
> vulnerable if somebody dumped them and pushed them onto a website).
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message