maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: move maven core to java 7?
Date Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:18:56 GMT
We are CTR not RTC

If you object to the change, veto the commit

On 6 March 2015 at 07:44, Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org> wrote:

> +1
> I just find the change/discussion a bit too fast.
> You should wait longer than ~10h as the world has more timezone.
> IMHO waiting for the answer from various members of the community is more
> like 2/3 days.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Olivier
> On 6 Mar 2015 10:37, "Jason van Zyl" <jason@takari.io> wrote:
>
> > Ok, the consensus is to move forward to Java7. I updated the POM and
> we're
> > in no rush so give it a whirl and we can think about releasing next week
> if
> > the world doesn't blow up.
> >
> > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Mirko Friedenhagen <mfriedenhagen@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello there,
> > >
> > > I would go for JDK7 as well, in April it will be EOLed anyway. I do
> > > not understand why someone who is forced to use JDK6 or let alone JDK5
> > > is allowed (or has) to use the newest versions of build tools BTW. IMO
> > > it is stressful enough to support two JDKs (on different at least 3
> > > OSes).
> > > Regards Mirko
> > > --
> > > http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com/
> > > https://github.com/mfriedenhagen/ (http://osrc.dfm.io/mfriedenhagen)
> > > https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Chris Graham <chrisgwarp@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> My preference is to always go for the lowest common denoninator, as it
> > >> gives the largest possible spread.
> > >>
> > >> My 'grumbling' as Stephen put it [ :-) ], is more that I'd like people
> > to
> > >> have an awareness that there are other platforms out there.
> > >>
> > >> For example, the current IBM WAS 8.x stack defaults to Java 6, and
> Java
> > 7
> > >> is an extra optional install. I'm not sure if there is an IBM Java 8
> > >> available (or being used in a product - I'm not sure, I've not looked,
> > and
> > >> now, I no long can!).
> > >>
> > >> Once the core moves the plugins will follow.
> > >>
> > >> I don't necessarilly agree with the premise that those stuck on older
> > >> versions of Java will not want to use the newer core/plugins,
> > especially as
> > >> backports of fixes are exceptionally uncommon.
> > >>
> > >> But if you feel the pressing need to update, feel free.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> khmarbaise@gmx.de>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> On 3/5/15 2:16 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> This is chicken-and-egg situation. We won't use java 7 features
> unless
> > >>>> the code targets java 7.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Try-with-resources and multi-exception catch are the too features
> I'd
> > >>>> like to start using throughout the code. Although not "critical"
per
> > se,
> > >>>> I think they make writing correct maintainable code noticeably
> easier.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Improvements to standard library, nio in particular, is another
big
> > >>>> reason for me. For example, Files#walkFileTree is significantly
> faster
> > >>>> than comparable File-based implementation on large source trees.
> > Knowing
> > >>>> the core is on java 7 will allow us use that in plexus-utils for
> > example.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Hm..plexus-utils is used in many plugins which would cause them to
> > upgrade
> > >>> to Java 7 as well ?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> Besides, java 7 is EOL'ed by Oracle next month. Yes, many
> > organizations
> > >>>> still use java 6 (and java 5), but the same organizations are not
> > likely
> > >>>> to move to use latest maven features any time soon either.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> Igor
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 2015-03-05 7:59, Robert Scholte wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I don't know the numbers, but I think JDK6 is still used a
lot by
> the
> > >>>>> community.
> > >>>>> Current code builds fine with JDK6.
> > >>>>> Which JDK7 specific features do you want to use, which are
not
> > possible
> > >>>>> with the current codebase?
> > >>>>> Without any critical codechanges I'd go for -1.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Robert
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Op Thu, 05 Mar 2015 13:19:11 +0100 schreef Igor Fedorenko
> > >>>>> <igor@ifedorenko.com>:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> With maven core version change to 3.3.0 on master, any objections
I
> > >>>>>> change compile source/target to java 7?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>>> Igor
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Kind regards
> > >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Jason van Zyl
> > Founder, Takari and Apache Maven
> > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> > http://twitter.com/takari_io
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're
> > talking about.
> >
> >  -- John von Neumann
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>

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