Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: message received from 54.164.171.186
 which is an MX secondary for dev@river.apache.org)
Message-ID: <554252F5.9060306@travellinck.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:06:13 +0200
From: Dawid Loubser <dawid@travellinck.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: <dev@river.apache.org>
Subject: Re: New release
References: <C3535EC6-B5F0-43E8-B021-F0102EF7CE55@asarian-tech.com>
 <554248E6.9080200@travellinck.com>
 <725306ED-DC13-4DFD-8357-3C156C68E28B@stratuscom.com>
In-Reply-To: <725306ED-DC13-4DFD-8357-3C156C68E28B@stratuscom.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="KmLJSfljtpGf84xvrIoOEVkBNEUNcPj6U"

--KmLJSfljtpGf84xvrIoOEVkBNEUNcPj6U
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

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=92t compile with Java 8.  I=
 suppose if a given user=92s 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 syste=
m work under Java 8.  I=92m 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> wro=
te:
>
>> I strongly support this! Peter's work needs to get out there and be
>> battle-proven, and anything that even inches towards River/OSGi harmon=
y
>> 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 le=
t
>> me know :-)
>>
>> regards,
>> Dawid Loubser
>>
>> On 30/04/2015 17:13, Dennis Reedy wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I didn=92t want to add this to the thread that Patricia started, but =
IMO I=92d like us to push for a new release ASAP. Peter=92s done a ton of=
 work, there are improvements needed to the RMI classloading approach tha=
t can help projects out there today that use OSGi, and we have to do some=
thing.
>>>
>>> What I=92d like to suggest is we create version 3.0, rename the com.s=
un.jini namespace to org.apache.river, and produce a new release. Lets ge=
t this done over the next quarter. I know there are alot of details with =
this proposal, and esoteric discussions surrounding =93what are we=94, bu=
t 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 bu=
g fixes are needed for 2.2.2 we can still provide support for it. Release=
 early, release often.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>


--KmLJSfljtpGf84xvrIoOEVkBNEUNcPj6U
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iF4EAREIAAYFAlVCUvUACgkQkCyTahXtZUv28AD+IbFtMr10kfI7b9Z7DUWXw6jb
FrI9B8mdAQ1Xm/3aC1QA/Rt7Mi3NQM6ttaOviC+Xd9n5ATuFOpSP5kGtfM9GqT0P
=G9QJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--KmLJSfljtpGf84xvrIoOEVkBNEUNcPj6U--