Mailing-List: contact dev-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: kristian.rosenvold@zenior.no
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAK2FUK0NzzvU38SY7CXzndwpLK4pRyH0savR2q0orydohyk2wA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <565CC6E6.3050508@apache.org>
	<7328A8F9-3BEB-4AAC-A1D7-DF7DA65836FD@takari.io>
	<CA+nPnMzTh_WpHfSp0v8QVtG2JRsyNrkai2NVddwCSK+Zn-6eww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAK8jvqy04dsXjo8xp92Uaw-MDR5XxnxjAK+=EfO30UrFqAC1wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJZRQKxBs8s=ppcYC0Vyx2uQ3zKvb9LjBieL_kVmZDTJ8hkn9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<2289510.eTV2oMN0xd@herve-desktop>
	<CA+nPnMznfFenbaMRAR1LozD4v40v-UKQnE-TL24N1a+NF0MNPw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABZhLO8VRubAREQg6KbEbg+Ca9iHX1V=Lci2M11XZ=s9LoGeZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+nPnMxsH2HuK2z4D+ELf8TzJO43TyVv_m4FMeun8oY3B_LbFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKuVzBS2ebPQ-fqDsc4Mcijzi75Ar6wDLzcMTBSEx3pCsa8W8A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKuVzBQwdmHjBThUGwBAJi5_-FNcxC-C-Z=o741mjUBur7wvgQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAK2FUK0NzzvU38SY7CXzndwpLK4pRyH0savR2q0orydohyk2wA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:16:40 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAJZRQKz1NzaraDTWA=6AT+4FdB6x0iad3JF3BjRNeEt6eRVbLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Java version requirement for Mavan 3.4.x
From: Kristian Rosenvold <kristian.rosenvold@gmail.com>
To: Maven Developers List <dev@maven.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f23457534c13e0526ea9257

--e89a8f23457534c13e0526ea9257
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

The new module can/may require jdk8. It may even be possible to build the
provider with an older jdk - it depends on what they do in JUnit 8; most of
the lambda stuff can be used from older versions - but if they expose jdk8
types on public api's there's not much alternative. From a practical point
of view, it's slightly inconvenient to be the only project requiring jdk8
(but someone has to be first, so...)

But initially it should be only the new provider with an upped language
level.

Kristian


2015-12-14 21:41 GMT+01:00 Andreas Gudian <andreas.gudian@gmail.com>:

> > JUnit 4 End Of Life
> >
> > I have a strong reason to use Java 8 in Surefire project.
> > For more information read this
> > https://github.com/junit-team/junit-lambda/issues/31
>
>
> Hi Tibor,
>
> Wouldn't it be enough to only build the new Junit-5 provider with
> source/target level 8 (if that would even be necessary) and switch the
> animal-sniffer to JDK 8 signatures only for that module? Or move that
> provider to its own repository with its own JDK 8 build...
>
> In any case, I don't think we'd have a strict requirement to move all of
> surefire to Java 8 bytecode only because of a new test provider - or a
> dependency thereof. Sure it would be cool to go full Java 8 in Surefire,
> but I don't think we can or should pull that off.
>

--e89a8f23457534c13e0526ea9257--