river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dawid Loubser <da...@travellinck.com>
Subject Re: New release
Date Thu, 30 Apr 2015 16:06:13 GMT
Ah, *that's* the issue I had stuck in the back of my mind now, the
"not-building" one.
I had somebody translated that into "not running" with Java 8 also.

thanks for clarifying,
Dawid


On 30/04/2015 18:03, Greg Trasuk wrote:
> 2.2.x works fine with Java 8, it just doesn’t compile with Java 8.  I suppose if a
given user’s build system uses classdep, then it would be a problem as well.  Do people
often use classdep?  I never have.
>
> Having said that, there was a patch contributed to make the build system work under Java
8.  I’m planning to apply that patch soon and spin a release of 2.2.x as well.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg Trasuk
>
> On Apr 30, 2015, at 11:23 AM, Dawid Loubser <dawid@travellinck.com> wrote:
>
>> I strongly support this! Peter's work needs to get out there and be
>> battle-proven, and anything that even inches towards River/OSGi harmony
>> needs to get out there so that people can experiment, build on top of, etc.
>> Finally - and I may be wrong about this - River 3 will be the first
>> version that plays well with Java 8? We really want to upgrade our
>> production systems to Java 8, and one of the blockers is the
>> (perceived?) notion that River 2.x does not work with Java 8.
>>
>> It's a bit off-topic, but if I'm wrong about that last part, please let
>> me know :-)
>>
>> regards,
>> Dawid Loubser
>>
>> On 30/04/2015 17:13, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I didn’t want to add this to the thread that Patricia started, but IMO I’d
like us to push for a new release ASAP. Peter’s done a ton of work, there are improvements
needed to the RMI classloading approach that can help projects out there today that use OSGi,
and we have to do something.
>>>
>>> What I’d like to suggest is we create version 3.0, rename the com.sun.jini
namespace to org.apache.river, and produce a new release. Lets get this done over the next
quarter. I know there are alot of details with this proposal, and esoteric discussions surrounding
“what are we”, but we either release or die. IMO, its that simple.
>>>
>>> If anyone does not like whats in 3.0, they can still use 2.2.2. If bug fixes
are needed for 2.2.2 we can still provide support for it. Release early, release often.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>



Mime
View raw message