groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alessio Stalla <alessiosta...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache Groovy Roadmap
Date Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:04:00 GMT
Sorry if outsiders are not meant to chime in :)

Why not
 - 2.5 as Cédric proposed (so Java 7 + macros)
 - 3.0 with Java 8 and Parrot
 - 4.0 with Java 9 and Jigsaw?

This way Groovy versions and Java versions are nicely aligned. To let
people try Parrot early, there could be a 3.0 early access release that
only replaces the antlr2-based parser with Parrot and bumps the required
Java version to 8.

On 31 January 2017 at 10:55, Cédric Champeau <cedric.champeau@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> 2017-01-31 10:46 GMT+01:00 Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag@gmx.org>:
>
>>
>>
>> On 31.01.2017 09:37, Cédric Champeau wrote:
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> There are multiple conversations going on for weeks, and I think they
>>> are going nowhere. We could discuss for months what's the best plan for
>>> Groovy, without releasing anything. Here are the challenges that are
>>> waiting for us:
>>>
>>> 1. release a version of Groovy that integrates Groovy macros
>>> 2. upgrade the minimal runtime required for Groovy to 1.7, which is
>>> required to smoothly transition to higher requirements (and also, make
>>> our devs lives easier)
>>> 3. upgrade the minimal runtime required for Groovy to 1.8, allowing us
>>> to drop the old call site caching and use indy Groovy everywhere
>>> 4. integrate Parrot, which replaces the use of Antlr2 with Antlr4
>>> 5. compatibility with Jigsaw, aka "Groovy as a module"
>>>
>> >
>>
>>> I would like to propose the following plan:
>>>
>>> - Groovy 2.5: integrates 1 and 2, to be released ASAP, we've been
>>> waiting for this for too long
>>> - Groovy 2.6: integrate 4, implying backporting Parrot to Java 7
>>> - Groovy 3.0: integrate 3 and 5. The only version with necessary
>>> breaking changes (we have no choice here)
>>>
>>
>> If you insist on a removal of antlr2, then this will be a breaking
>> change, since we leak antlr2 classes in several places. 2.6 is then only an
>> option if antlr2 stays. And considering your earlier statements that there
>> should be only one parser, that means 2.6 has to be 3.0.
>>
>> And considering that there is now a Java7 version of Parrot and that
>> there will be at least two major versions before we are on JDK8... why not
>> just go with 3.0 right away?
>>
>
> Because macro groovy doesn't have to be bound with breaking changes.
>
>
>>
>> So my -1 based on your argumentation from my side. An alternative plan:
>>
>> no 2.5
>> - 3.0 with macro methods and Java7 and parrot
>> - 4.0 java8 and jigsaw
>>
>> bye Jochen
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message