Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of grobmeier@gmail.com designates
 209.85.216.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOGo0Va0w9PP_TrsRAYRAQfaesWbuFQJdbkjmE=WCJPPu5X_hQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1323094640213-4160635.post@n4.nabble.com>
 <CAAqLGLO5ZuLEtTck_QEvYZxMBcWdWXhyRijwynt4toW3SCTm5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOGo0Va0w9PP_TrsRAYRAQfaesWbuFQJdbkjmE=WCJPPu5X_hQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:53:12 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAPFNckjDxxBab_Y9pJmEWvKLvovvTJaoHtwwWK7Yznsq17zwFA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Can the next version major version of a project require
 Java6? (i.e. drop Java 1.5)
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:43 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 December 2011 15:06, Simone Tripodi <simonetripodi@apache.org> wrote=
:
>> Salut Henri,
>>
>> if you need the Java6 APIs to provide a fresh new set of APIs to JEXL
>> users, I would be +1.
>> We recently accepted Java6 in Apache Cocoon since Oracle announced
>> Java 5 SE EOL (End Of Life) since 2009.
>
> Cocoon is a slightly different case, as it's probably not embedded in
> other components as much as Commons components are.

Java 5 EOL 2009? Thats 2 years. I mean, we can still make releases of
JEXL 2.x and fix bugs, while the new JEXL 3.x line supports a newer
Java and creates new features. I think this is how most software
vendors do it. Make the old line bugfix only and concentrate on the
new line with current platform.

>> Anyway I would to point you to a message in the ASF Tika ML[1] where
>> describing the pros and cons about moving to Java6 - I wonder how many
>> users would still require Java4/5 to run JEXL.
>
> Exactly - but I'm not sure we'll find that out by asking on the
> developer list, where one would expect people to install the new
> versions of Java as they come out.
>
> If the argument is that Jexl users don't need it to run on Java 1.5,
> then a better place to ask the question might be the user list.

Jexl users in need of 1.5 can still use the 2.x line. Where is the problem?
If we always ask about every of our steps we will never go forward.

Cheers

>
>
>> Break a leg, all the best,
>> Simo
>>
>> [1] http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/support-of-Java-5-td3039517.html
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:17 PM, henrib <henrib@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Sorry to bug everyone again, I'm hopelessly trying to make Commons move=
 a
>>> little forward...
>>>
>>> Since a 2-person opposition never breaks the tie, a vote is in order to
>>> decide whether JEXL3 (aka the next major version after 2.1, see JEXL-12=
3)
>>> can actually break loose of Java 1.5 compatibility. (sic)
>>>
>>> JEXL3 is intended to be a next major release of JEXL that cleans up the=
 API,
>>> making sure the internal/public contract is crystal clear. Since it is =
a
>>> major revamp of the API, JEXL3 is intended to be used by new/active pro=
jects
>>> that will be deployed on Java6 / Java7. To avoid some development cost,=
 I've
>>> "blatantly" crossed another rule without much thinking by requiring Jav=
a6
>>> for JEXL3 (instead of Java5 which is EOL).
>>>
>>> Since JEXL2.1 - aka the next imminent version of jexl2 - already target=
s
>>> Java 1.5, I did not think it would start yet another fight with the rel=
ease
>>> police. Was I wrong... "Why can't you supporting a EOL-ed platform for =
a new
>>> version of the project?". (Because it's not a freebie for me but no mat=
ter).
>>>
>>> So, here we are again for some bickering and vote:
>>> [+1] Yes, you may release the next major release of JEXL3 with a Java6
>>> requirement
>>> [-1] No, this is an important case/issue/matter/rule that we continue
>>> supporting Java 1.5
>>> [0] =C2=A0Don't care
>>>
>>> Many thanks to those who will vote for their time and patience;
>>> Henrib
>>>
>>> PS: Is there a process to formally move a project from Commons to elsew=
here
>>> within Apache?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context: http://apache-commons.680414.n4.nabble.co=
m/VOTE-Can-the-next-version-major-version-of-a-project-require-Java6-i-e-dr=
op-Java-1-5-tp4160635p4160635.html
>>> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>


--=20
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org