commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amey Jadiye <ameyjad...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [daemon] moving to git ? and bump java version.
Date Mon, 17 Jul 2017 13:00:01 GMT
Hi Gary,

I will take a look at pending issues if something is blocker to release, I
see already 9 issues are done for 1.1.0 release .  if we are ok with these
9, anyone can release it. BTW how do you guys decide that "this is a time
to release!"  for any component ?

Regards,
Amey

On Jul 16, 2017 10:38 PM, "Gary Gregory" <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:

> If someone here is really going to put time and energy into daemon, it
> would be fantastic to start with a release. It's been so long...  Then
> fiddle away on tweaks, and release again.
>
> Gary
>
> On Jul 16, 2017 08:49, "Matt Sicker" <boards@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > C quality somewhat depends on which version of C you're trying to remain
> > compatible with (I'm guessing C89 due to Windows, though I could be
> wrong).
> > Valgrind and other tracing tools are typically used. I'd take a look at
> > what OpenOffice is doing for local examples (though they have a crazy
> build
> > system last I heard), or the FSF, Linux, Xorg, FreeDesktop, GNOME, KDE,
> or
> > other major users of C and C++.
> >
> > On the modern front, it'd be interesting if it were written in Rust,
> though
> > I don't know enough about the language to say if it's worth porting to
> > eventually.
> >
> > On 15 July 2017 at 09:26, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 15 July 2017 at 15:21, Amey Jadiye <ameyjadiye@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Yes, that's mentioned  in my previous mail, I was also curious to
> know
> > > from
> > > > the C developers here in dev-list that how can we make *that* C code
> > > > better? basically I'm looking findbug, checkstyle, jococo, junit
> > > >  *equivalent* for C code.
> > >
> > > No idea on automated tools.
> > > However when I last looked there was plenty of scope for better
> > > documentation.
> > >
> > > Also I did wonder if the Prunmgr GUI might be better coded as a
> > > (mainly) Java application.
> > >
> > > The procrun stuff has to remain as C.
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Amey
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 7:44 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Also note that there is hardly any Java code; most of it is written
> in
> > > C.
> > > >>
> > > >> On 14 July 2017 at 00:43, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> > It seems OK to me to update to Java 6 for now and get this to
> > compile
> > > >> under
> > > >> > java 9 for those folks who will try...
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Gary
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Amey Jadiye <
> ameyjadiye@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> Thanks for great insights Mark.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017, 9:28 PM Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> > On 12 July 2017 16:33:01 CEST, Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> >> > >Are there plans to require 1.7 for Tomcat anytime?
Otherwise,
> it
> > > >> might
> > > >> >> > >be
> > > >> >> > >necessary to make a new major version of daemon
eventually for
> > > Java 8
> > > >> >> > >or 9.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Tomcat major versions are aligned with Java EE versions
which
> in
> > > turn
> > > >> >> have
> > > >> >> > a minimum Java version.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Tomcat supports 3 current versions in parallel so we
currently
> > > have:
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Tomcat 9 - Java EE 8 - Java 8
> > > >> >> > Tomcat 8 - Java EE 7 - Java 7
> > > >> >> > Tomcat 7 - Java EE 6 - Java 6
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Tomcat 7 support will continue until at least Java EE
9 is
> > > released.
> > > >> That
> > > >> >> > is meant to be next year but there are no firm dates
yet and
> > > >> experience
> > > >> >> > suggests the Java EE 9 release date will slip.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > On that basis I expect Tomcat to need a Daemon that
supports
> > Java 6
> > > >> for
> > > >> >> at
> > > >> >> > least 2 more years.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Is there a user requirement driving an increase in the
minimum
> > Java
> > > >> >> > version? If not, I suggest we stick with 6 for now.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> There is no user requirement , Commons daemon is still keeping
> > > minimum
> > > >> >> dependency on java 1.5, we were thinking to move on minimum
1.6,
> > > nice to
> > > >> >> hear there won't be any issue with tomcat since it's already
on
> 1.6
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> For moving to much higher i.e. java 1.7 I'm sure daemon will
take
> > > >> another
> > > >> >> 2-3 year for keeping stability across projects.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Regards,
> > > >> >> Amey
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Mark
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> >> > >Anyways, 1.6 minimum makes sense to me mainly due
to Java 9's
> > > >> compiler
> > > >> >> > >not
> > > >> >> > >supporting Java 5 targets anymore.
> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> >> > >On 12 July 2017 at 09:19, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> >> > >> On 11 July 2017 21:02:54 CEST, Amey Jadiye
<
> > > ameyjadiye@gmail.com>
> > > >> >> > >wrote:
> > > >> >> > >> >Hi Daemon Maintainers / All,
> > > >> >> > >> >
> > > >> >> > >> >Daemon seems to be still being maintained
on svn, do we
> have
> > > any
> > > >> >> > >plan
> > > >> >> > >> >moving code base to git ?
> > > >> >> > >>
> > > >> >> > >> No preference on this.
> > > >> >> > >>
> > > >> >> > >> >As fact there is low activity in daemon
no one thought of
> > > bumping
> > > >> >> > >> >version
> > > >> >> > >> >from 1.5 to 1.6 OR we are keeping it purposefully
to 1.5 ?
> > > >> >> > >> >shall we bump it minimum to 1.6 ?
> > > >> >> > >>
> > > >> >> > >> 1.6 is OK for Tomcat. Anything higher will
cause problems.
> > > >> >> > >>
> > > >> >> > >> Mark
> > > >> >> > >>
> > > >> >> > >> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
> > > >> ---------
> > > >> >> > >> 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
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > >
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
> >
>

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